Modiano auguri s.d.

Thanks, and a lot, again, for this efficient intervention. I do appreciate.

And thanks to our Gods : this is a strong positive message for the end of this year, and for our future.


Vale sincerely Augur,


Albucius cos.




Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 07:43:40 -0500
Subject: Re: [NovaRoma-Announce] Request to take the auspices for our coming annual comitia
From: tau.athanasios@...
To: albucius_aoe@...

Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus Publio Memmio Albucio salutem dicit


I have taken the auspices this morning shortly after sunrise, and they were favorable.


Vale;


Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus augur

On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Publius Memmius Albucius <albucius_aoe@...> wrote:


Modiano auguri s.d.


Thanks a lot, Augur, for your reactivity !


Vale,


Albucius cos.

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

Salve Praetoria,

Do not worry. Things will be presented and explained in time, here and in the web site.

To say short, our cives will vote through an e-mail address and their vote will be received by the diribitors.

We will adopt the best technical system as (humanly) possible, which will try to guarantee a relative secrecy of the vote and its management by the diribitors who, as magistrates, are supposed to keep private the informations that they are going to handle, as our custodes and both presiding magistrates.

Considering the composition of the Elections Management Teams who are appointed, for both orders, and who are composed by honest, working and experimented citizens, I have no worry about this.

Vale,


Albucius cos.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Tullia Scholastica" <fororom@...> wrote:

> > A. Tullia Scholastica P. Memmio Albucio quiritibus bonae voluntatis S.P.D.
> >
> >
> > Edictum consulare Memmium concerning the organization of Novaroman elections
> > 2763 auc
> >
> >
> > Quaeso ut haec omnia in Latinum [et fortasse] in Gallicum vertas ut nos
> > omnes intellegant, nam perdifficilia intellectu sunt, praesertim modum
> > suffragiorum ferendorum. Habebimusne cistam, ut solemus, an in greges Yahoo
> > secernemur, sicut antea propositum erat? Eruntne suffragia secreta?
> >
> > Clarius luce arbitror novaculam illam Ockhami genas scholarum de legibus
> > numquam strinxisse, praesertim si non modo entia, sed etiam verba, non
> > multiplicanda praeter necessitatem. ;-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > (de Novaromani suffragii 2763 auc ferendi)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In view of the:
> > *
> > * Constitution of Nova Roma
> > (http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Current_constitution_%28Nova_Roma%29);
> > *
> > * various laws organizing the electoral process in Nova Roma and consultable
> > at: http://www.novaroma.org/nr/List_of_leges
> > <http://www.novaroma.org/nr/List_of_leges> ;
> > *
> > * senatus consultum of a.d. III Idus 2763 auc. investing the consul maior ³of
> > the power to modify, by edictum, the current legislation relative to the
> > electoral system of Nova Roma (tools, proceedings, etc.) in order to adapt it
> > to the creation of an electoral system which, as simple and efficient as
> > possible, will allow Nova Roma institutions, and specially its comitia, to go
> > on working normally without the assistance of the current IT system². (
> > http://novaroma.org/nr/SC_2763_Nov._1-2_%28Nova_Roma%29
> > <http://novaroma.org/nr/SC_2763_Nov._1-2_(Nova_Roma)> )
> > *
> > * other senatus consultum of a.d. III Idus 2763 auc, on the ³required
> > vigintisexviri² which gives the same consul ³the power to define, after due
> > consultation, the appropriate number and nature of the positions of
> > vigintisexviri which will be necessary to guarantee the good working of the
> > annual elections in 2763 auc². (
> > http://novaroma.org/nr/SC_2763_Nov._1-3_%28Nova_Roma%29
> > <http://novaroma.org/nr/SC_2763_Nov._1-3_(Nova_Roma)> )
> > *
> > * senatus consultum ultimum of a.d. XIII Kal. Dec. 2763 auc replacing the
> > third sentence of the paragraph IV.A of the Constitution of Nova Roma by the
> > following one : ³Elections of the ordinarii shall take place every civil year
> > no later than December 1 for the plebeian magistracies and December 20 for the
> > curule quaestorial and vigintisexviri magistracies. Newly elected magistrates
> > shall enter their offices on December 10, for the plebeian magistrates, and on
> > the following Kalends of January, for the other ones.² (
> > http://novaroma.org/nr/SC_2763_Nov._2-1_%28Nova_Roma%29 )
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Considering that the current edictum and its possible amendments aim to keep
> > the best balance as possible between the previous electoral laws and tools,
> > and the measures which are necessary to guarantee the good working of all the
> > annual elections 2763 for 2764 auc, or adapt these laws and tools when they
> > are no longer relevant, specially concerning the entry in office of the
> > Plebeian magistrates ;
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I, P. Memmius Albucius, consul maior for year 2763 a.u.c., issue the present
> > edict:
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 1:
> >
> >
> >
> > The current applicable laws are applicable to the annual elections 2763,
> > unless they be modified by the provisions below.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 2:
> >
> >
> >
> > The following provisions, drawn from the articles III and IV of lex Salicia de
> > prorogatione et cumulatione shall be applied :
> >
> >
> >
> > ³If, after Nov. 25th for the Plebeian elections and Nov. 28th for the other
> > ones, a certain magistracy has, during the annual elections 2763 auc, a number
> > of legal candidates that is lower than the number of offices to be filled, the
> > period of presentation of candidacies shall be extended by an additional
> > period for that magistracy only. During this extended period, the provisions
> > indicated in paragraph III of this lex shall be considered temporarily
> > withdrawn for candidacies to that magistracy.
> >
> > This period shall last four (4) days for the plebeian elections and five (5)
> > days for the other ones.
> >
> > On the last day of each period, the relevant presiding magistrate will state
> > the definitive list of the candidates allowed to run for the considered
> > magistracy.²
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 3:
> >
> >
> >
> > The drawing by lots of the presiding tribe and of the prerogative century
> > shall be assumed by the concerned presiding magistrate, and not by the
> > diribitors. The result of this drawing shall be communicated in the document
> > (edictum or any other relevant form) by which the relevant presiding
> > magistrate (consul or tribune) will call the tribes or centuries to order.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 4:
> >
> >
> >
> > The call evoked in the article 3 shall be issued no later than the last day of
> > the period evoked in the article 2.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 5:
> >
> >
> >
> > The contio and voting periods of every concerned annual elections 2763 are
> > reduced to :
> > *
> > * three (3) days for both, for the plebeian elections ;
> > *
> > * for the other elections,
> >> *
> >> * four (4) days for the contio ;
> >> *
> >> * five (5) days for the vote.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 6:
> >
> >
> >
> > The presiding magistrates watches that the contio of the concerned comitia
> > begins the day which follows immediately the last day of the period evoked by
> > the article two.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 7:
> >
> >
> >
> > The counting and tally of the votes, as well as their assignment to the
> > relevant tribes or centuries, or the verification of such assignment, shall
> > last three (3) days, from:
> > *
> > * 6 to 8 Dec. 2010 cc. for the plebeian elections ;
> > *
> > * 16 to 18 Dec. 2010 cc. for the other elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > The certification by the concerned magistrate and the proclamation of the
> > results by the presiding magistrate shall be issued in the same day, on :
> > *
> > * 9 Dec. 2010 cc. for the plebeian elections ;
> > *
> > * 20 Dec. 2010 cc. for the other elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 8:
> >
> >
> >
> > Without prejudice of the method agreed between the concerned presiding
> > magistrates, diribitors, and custodes, these last ones shall keep their full
> > power to substitute for a diribitor or a custos who, for any reason, would not
> > have fulfilled her/his obligations within the framework of the present edictum
> > or of the operational calendar defined by the presiding magistrate.
> >
> > In such case, and without the need to specify it, the concerned vigintisexvir
> > would be considered as suspended, or removed if her/his appointment has been
> > made by an edictum, as allowed by the Senate.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 9:
> >
> >
> >
> > The publication of the results shall respect the usual order below, but this
> > time within the framework of a sole day :
> >
> > 1/ presiding or prerogative electoral unit (tribe or century)
> >
> > 2/ (only for the curule etc. elections) first class centuries
> >
> > 3/ all other units
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 10:
> >
> >
> >
> > The publication of the results of the annual elections for 2764 auc shall be
> > issued in December 2763, no later than the :
> > *
> > * 9th for the plebeian elections ;
> > *
> > * 23h for the other elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 11:
> >
> >
> >
> > In application with the senatus consultum ultimum of last Nov. 19, the
> > magistrates elected in the concerned elections shall enter in office on :
> > *
> > * Dec. 10, 2763 auc for the plebeian ones (tribunes and aediles) ;
> > *
> > * Jan. 1, 2764 auc for the other ones.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 12:
> >
> >
> >
> > The present edict is worth the request to the public augurs to take, in the
> > time frame defined by the present edictum, the required auspices for every
> > concerned non plebeian elections. In case of unfavorable auspices, the
> > calendar evoked in this edict shall be adapted in consequence.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 13:
> >
> >
> >
> > No special reassignment shall be made by the censor(s) for these annual
> > elections. The censor(s) shall assign to a relevant electoral unit (century
> > and/or tribe) the citizens who are, in conformity with the existing laws, in
> > the expectation of a assignment or of a definitive assignment. Such assignment
> > shall be done in the respect of both following rules :
> > *
> > * selecting an electoral unit which has less members than the average of
> > centuries or tribes ;
> > *
> > * no assignment in the first twenty electoral units.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 14:
> >
> >
> >
> > Both orders will organize its elections with a specific magisterial team,
> > under the leadership of the concerned presiding magistrate. Except other
> > dispositions agreed between tribunes or consuls, the presiding magistrate
> > shall be the convening one.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Plebeian elections shall be placed under the scrutiny of the presiding
> > tribune, and shall comprise in addition one custos and two diribitors, all
> > Plebeians.
> >
> >
> >
> > The other elections shall be placed under the scrutiny of the presiding
> > consul, and shall comprise in addition two custodes and four diribitors,
> > either Plebeians or Patricians.
> >
> >
> >
> > Are assigned to the Plebeian elections 2763 :
> > *
> > * custos : E. Curia Finnica
> > *
> > * diribitors : Gaius Marcius Crispus and G. Cocceius Spinula
> >
> >
> >
> > In case of unavailability of one of these three citizens, (s)he will be
> > replaced by Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus, whose title (custos
> > or diribitor) will be adapted accordingly.
> >
> >
> >
> > Are assigned to the curule and other magisterial non plebeian elections 2763 :
> > *
> > * custodes : E. Curia Finnica and G. Petronius Dexter ;
> > *
> > * diribitors : Gnaeus Equitius Marinus, Aula Tullia Scholastica, Q. Caecilius
> > Metellus Pius Postumianus and G. Cocceius Spinula
>
> ATS: Gratias quam plurimas, nam sicut deus verus, mihi
> peritias quam numquam habui libenter dedisti. Miror me subito
> ratiocinatricem factam esse etsi haud numerare possum. Munus hoc, ergo,
> recusandum mihi, nam id facere nequeo, etsi probationibus scribendis et
> pensis probationibus corrigendis occupata non essem. Peritias meas bene
> scio; scio bene illas de numeris abesse. Spero te aliquem aequam volentem
> peritam quae sciat quid inter bonum et malum intersit invenire posse.
> >
> >
> >
> > In case of unavailability of one of the four diribitors, (s)he will be
> > replaced by Gaius Marcius Crispus.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 15:
> >
> >
> >
> > In application of the previous article,
> >
> >
> > 1. Diribitor M. Arminius Maior is suspended until the end of his annual term
> > for his failure to select, along with the other diribitors, a centuria
> > praerogativa during last July centuriate elections.
> >
> >
> > 1. The following suffecti are hereby appointed :
> >> 1.
> >> 2. Diribitores, from Kal. Dec. 2763 to pridie Kal. Ian. 2764 auc :
> >>>> *
> >>>> * Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus,
> >>>> *
> >>>> * Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
> >>>> *
> >>>> * Aula Tullia Scholastica
> >>>> *
> >>>> * Gaius Cocceius Spinula
> >>>> *
> >>>> * Gaius Marcius Crispus
> >
> >
> >
> > b. from a.d. IV Idus Decembres until pridie Kal. Ian. 2764 auc, G. Petronius
> > Dexter as custos ;
> >
> > c. If Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus was to replace the plebeian
> > custos, his title (custos or diribitor) would be adapted accordingly.
> >
> >
> >> 1. The vigintisexviri appointed within the framework of the present article
> >> fulfill their duties in the state of their composition and of the article 8
> >> above.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 16:
> >
> >
> >
> > For the non-Plebeian elections, two results are given by the concerned
> > vigintisexviri to the presiding magistrate : the usual one, by tribes or by
> > centuries according the concerned election, and a second one, head by head.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 17:
> >
> >
> >
> > All citizens legally allowed to vote shall cast their vote by sending it to a
> > ³cista e-address² (type xxx@... <mailto:xxx@...> or .xx)
> >
> >
> >
> > Two such ³cista e-addresses² shall be thus available :
> > *
> > * one for the Plebeian elections ;
> > *
> > * one for the other elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > Each ³cista e-address² shall be placed under the responsibility of the
> > concerned presiding magistrate, as defined in the article 14 above, which
> > watches that he and every concerned vigintisexviri may access to it at any
> > time.
> >
> > The password of this address shall thus be shared by the presiding magistrate,
> > the diribitors and custos/-odes, and, if the presiding magistrates sees fit,
> > with the censor, who might thus check that the electoral operations are
> > conducted in the respect of Nova Roma current rules and of the equal right of
> > every candidate.
> >
> > Both ³cista e-addresses² will be displayed, in order to avoid possible
> > spamming, just before the opening of the voting period of the concerned
> > elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > In addition, an internet list of discussion, specially dedicated to the annual
> > elections 2763 for 2764, shall be managed, by every concerned presiding
> > magistrate, a few days before the vote. It will welcome the magistrates
> > mentioned above, and their relevant discussions, verifications and exchanges.
> >
> > The e-address of both lists will be communicated to the concerned magistrates
> > and to the censor, still in order to avoid possible spamming, a few days
> > before the opening of the vote of the relative elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 18:
> >
> >
> >
> > A ³cista form² shall be available in a special page, in Nova Roma web site,
> > and placed under the survey of both presiding magistrates and the Magister
> > aranearius.
> >
> >
> >
> > Every citizen legally allowed to vote shall be invited to copy and paste this
> > form in the voting e-mail that (s)he will send to the ³cista e-address² and to
> > complete it, according the specifications given by this page, with her/his
> > voting decisions and the informations (Roman full name, etc.) that will be
> > requested in the same page.
> >
> >
> >
> > If necessary, several ³cista forms² shall be available to fill the
> > requirements of the various elections.
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 19:
> >
> >
> >
> > The present edictum being an implementation measure of decisions taken by Nova
> > Roma Inc. Board, it shall prevail on every other contrary provision of Nova
> > Roma institutions, except decisions taken, within the framework of Nova Roma
> > Inc. by-laws (Constitution) by Nova Roma Inc. General Meeting (comitia
> > centuriata).
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 20:
> >
> >
> >
> > The convening of the comitia centuriata called to vote on the annual elections
> > of curule and minor non plebeian magistracies shall be worth, according the
> > incorporation Law, of the convening of by NR Inc. annual General Meeting.
> >
> >
> >
> > In conformity with Nova Roma Inc. practice, this General Meeting shall be led
> > online via electronic discussions and vote and as described above, unless 1/10
> > of Nova Roma's members allowed to vote ask, by a duly expressed will and
> > before the opening of the General Meeting, that it be led physically.
> >
> > In this case, the presiding magistrate would adjourne this General Meeting and
> > the vote on all non plebeian positions and matters, and convene a second
> > General Meeting according the provisions of the title 13-B, Chapter 6 of Maine
> > Revised Statutes Act (M.R.S.A.). In this case, all non-Plebeian institutions
> > shall be obliged to remain in position until the General Meeting, duly
> > convened and held as soon as possible, would have voted the election of the
> > magistrates/officers for 2764 auc.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Article 21:
> >
> >
> > Every Nova Roman public officer shall, as far as their duties require, enforce
> > the present edict, which will be published in the Tabularium Novae Romae and
> > in Nova Roma relevant internet 'discussion' lists.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Datum a.d. VII Kal. Dec. 2763 a.u.c. (Nov. 25th, 2010 cc.) P. Memmio Albucio
> > K. Fabio Buteone Quintiliano II coss.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > P. MEMMIUS ALBUCIUS cos.
> >
> > Vale, et valete.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salvete, Quirites!
 
I come before you to announce my candidacy for Quaestorship.
 
I am citizen of Nova Roma since 2008. I'm from Provincia Brasilia and my interesets include Roman religion, especially the cult of Diana, but I am interested in Roman history and culture as a whole. In a join team with other Brasilians, I am organizing the first official study of religio Romana in Provincia Brasilia.
 
We are few in this Province, and I'm one of those who strive to make Provincia Brasilia a vibrant, active community of Nova Roma, and I contributed to these efforts by participating religious works and projects that we've been developing in NR Brasilia by ourselves.
 
I would like to serve our Res Publica Nova Roma, and to help our international community by serving in the office of Quaestor. If elected, I will take my duty very seriously, and I will work hard to help the community, and the higher magistrate who will be assigned to me.
 
I fit all the requirements, I'm 21 years old, an assidua and good standing citizen of Nova Roma.
 
With these words, I ask your support in these elections for the office of Questorship.
 
Valete!
 
Ap. Domitia Taura
Quaestrix Candidata




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

Ave!

Which laws would you repeal? Which laws would you change and why? What
would be a reasonable time frame for repealing those laws you suggested?

Respectfully,

Sulla


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

Cato Cornelio Sullae omnibusque in foro SPD

Here are some of the ideas I've floated in the past, which I would like to consider if I am elected consul - and actually even if I am *not* elected:

____________________________________________________________________


1. The leges Salicia poenalis and iudiciaria are repealed.
2. The lex Equitia de iurisdiction is repealed
3. The lex Arminia Equitia de imperio is repealed
4. The lex Minucia eiuratione magistratum is repealed

____________________________________________________________________

lex __________ de Legibus Discendis

I. Any citizen seeking the office of praetor or consul will be required to first
complete successfully an 'Introduction to Nova Roman Law' class.

II. This class will be administered three times a year, beginning the Kalends of
Februarius, Kalends of Iunius, and Kalends of Octobris, under the authority of
one citizen appointed annually by the Senate and one citizen appointed annually
by the tribunes of the plebs.

III. This course may also be taken at any time it is offered by any
citizen who is interested as often as they would like without restriction; once
a citizen has successfully completed the course he or she does not need to take
it again to run for any office in the future.

IV. The course may include quizzes and essay requirements, and will
culminate in a final exam that will be submitted to a blind panel of five chosen
from among the senators and tribunes by lot. The results of the final exam will
be posted in the forum within one week of the final exam being given.

V. This law shall take effect on the Kalends of Ianuarius 2763

_____________________________________________________________________

lex _____________ de cursu honorum

The Lex Vedia de cursu honorum and The Lex Arminia de cursu honorum are
repealed.

I. No individual may assume the office of Censor who has not completed at least
one of the following:
a. a full term as Consul.
b. at least six months (180 calendar days) as Consul suffectus.

II. No individual may assume the office of Consul who has not completed at least
one of the following:
a. a full term as Praetor.
b. at least six months (180 calendar days) as Praetor suffectus.

III. No individual may assume the office of Praetor who has not completed a full
term as either Aedilis Curulis, Tribunus Plebis or Aedilis Plebis.

IV. No individual may assume the office of Aedilis Curulis, Tribunus Plebis or
Aedilis Plebis who has not completed a full term as Quaestor.

V. No individual may assume the office Quaestor who is not at least 21 years of
age and been an assiduus (taxpaying) citizen of Nova Roma for at least one year.

VI. Citizens who resign their positions prior to the normal end of their term in
office may not use that position to fulfill any of these requirements,
regardless of how much time they spent in office.

VII. Citizens may run for office prior to the completion of these requirements
but must be in full compliance prior to assuming office and must be an assiduus
(taxpaying) citizen of Nova Roma when announcing their candidacy.

VIII. Any magistrate who resigns from office with three months (119 calendar
days) or less left in their term will lose all century points for that office,
an additional twenty-five century points and be barred from standing for elected
office for two years.

IX. No sitting elected magistrate may present themselves as a candidate for
elected office for the following year. The sole exception shall be a magistrate
suffectus who has served not more than six months (179 calendar days) in their
magistracy as suffectus.

X. This law shall take effect on the Kalends of Ianuarius 2763.

_____________________________________________________________________

the lex ____________ de eiuratione magistratum

Resignation from any magisterial office takes effect immediately upon an
announcement being made publicly (i.e., on the "Main List") by that magistrate
that they are tendering their resignation. That magistracy is considered vacant
as of the publishing of that announcement, and the vacancy must be filled by an
election within thirty (30) days pursuant to applicable law.

______________________________________________________________________


AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

(by deletion)

The sentence "Should one of the ordinarii be found to be derelict
in his duties, that magistrate may be removed by a law originating in the
comitia that elected him." is removed from the Constitution (IV.A)

(by addition)

IV. C. Removal of Magistrates

1. The People may, after being called in comitia, remove an elected
magistrate from power and simultaneously rescind his or her imperium by a vote
of at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the vote of those citizens casting a
valid ballot in a recall election. If a magistrate is removed from office, an
election must be held to fill the office with in thirty (30) calendar days of
the office becoming vacant.

2. upon receiving public request in the Forum (known as the 'Main List') for a
vote on the removal of a magistrate by at least twenty (20) assidui citizens,
any magistrate with the power to do so shall call the People into any
appropriate comitia to allow a vote, even one which would not ordinarily fall
under their jurisdiction; such a call is not subject to veto by any other
magistrate of any rank whatsoever. Failure to do so within one nundinum will be
itself considered a dereliction of duty and may be actionable by appropriate
law.

______________________________________________________________________


The lex _________ iudiciaria

1. A citizen (the actor) may exercize their right to bring a lawsuit against any
other citizen (the reus) unless restricted by law [i.e., sitting magistrates or
on a dies nefastus publicus, etc.]. The praetors may either accept or deny a
lawsuit based on its merits as presented by the actor.

2. If the praetors do not accept a citizen's lawsuit, the actor may appeal the
praetor's decision to the consuls. If the consuls refuse to hear it, the actor
may appeal to the People. The People's decision is final.

3. The magistrate who has agreed to hear the lawsuit shall set up whatever
framework he or she thinks best suited for the individual case regarding
submission of evidence and hearing of testimony; the magistrate will then choose
to create a panel of three, five, or seven iudices to hear and render judgement.
All lawsuits shall be heard in a manner that is open to all citizens to observe.

4. Once the case has been heard, the presiding magistrate shall render a
verdict, which shall be announced in the Forum by the presiding magistrate. If
the verdict is not acceptable to the reus, they may appeal to the next highest
ranking magistrates; ultimately, they may appeal to the People. The People's
decision is final.

5. The iudices may not violate Nova Roman or applicable federal, state, or local
laws in rendering judgement. A sentence shall be based on severity of crime;
however, only a vote of the People can banish a citizen.

______________________________________________________________________

I have reasons supporting each of these suggestions, either in common sense or
as a means to more closely adhere to ancient Roman practice; for instance, the
consuls never heard law cases except in extreme circumstances and then only when
specifically asked to by the Senate.


Valete,

Cato

SALVE CATO ET SALVETE!
 
I know your practical style and I agree with it. If you will be elected - and I hope so - I am sure that your proposals will be discussed and promoted to people to vote.
 
With one thing I am reluctant: when somebody tries to fix something which is totally based of something else.
 
Example:
"Any citizen seeking the office of praetor or consul will be required to first complete successfully an 'Introduction to Nova Roman Law' class."
 
You are sure that someone is all the time available to teach that class? And if not what it means, we will have not praetors and consuls?
 
The most important problem of NR is the voluntary work. In NR people wants to see many things but those who really work represent only a small group. I am afraid there will be not someone all the time available to teach the class and if is, which is the guarantee that the teacher will be impartial when teaching his students?
 
Difficult to put in practice, in my opinion. About the other, when the time will come.
 
VALE,
Sabinus



"Every individual is the architect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, Cato <catoinnyc@...> wrote:


From: Cato <catoinnyc@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 9:53 PM


 



Cato Cornelio Sullae omnibusque in foro SPD

Here are some of the ideas I've floated in the past, which I would like to consider if I am elected consul - and actually even if I am *not* elected:

__________________________________________________________

1. The leges Salicia poenalis and iudiciaria are repealed.
2. The lex Equitia de iurisdiction is repealed
3. The lex Arminia Equitia de imperio is repealed
4. The lex Minucia eiuratione magistratum is repealed

__________________________________________________________

lex __________ de Legibus Discendis

I. Any citizen seeking the office of praetor or consul will be required to first
complete successfully an 'Introduction to Nova Roman Law' class.

II. This class will be administered three times a year, beginning the Kalends of
Februarius, Kalends of Iunius, and Kalends of Octobris, under the authority of
one citizen appointed annually by the Senate and one citizen appointed annually
by the tribunes of the plebs.

III. This course may also be taken at any time it is offered by any
citizen who is interested as often as they would like without restriction; once
a citizen has successfully completed the course he or she does not need to take
it again to run for any office in the future.

IV. The course may include quizzes and essay requirements, and will
culminate in a final exam that will be submitted to a blind panel of five chosen
from among the senators and tribunes by lot. The results of the final exam will
be posted in the forum within one week of the final exam being given.

V. This law shall take effect on the Kalends of Ianuarius 2763

__________________________________________________________

lex _____________ de cursu honorum

The Lex Vedia de cursu honorum and The Lex Arminia de cursu honorum are
repealed.

I. No individual may assume the office of Censor who has not completed at least
one of the following:
a. a full term as Consul.
b. at least six months (180 calendar days) as Consul suffectus.

II. No individual may assume the office of Consul who has not completed at least
one of the following:
a. a full term as Praetor.
b. at least six months (180 calendar days) as Praetor suffectus.

III. No individual may assume the office of Praetor who has not completed a full
term as either Aedilis Curulis, Tribunus Plebis or Aedilis Plebis.

IV. No individual may assume the office of Aedilis Curulis, Tribunus Plebis or
Aedilis Plebis who has not completed a full term as Quaestor.

V. No individual may assume the office Quaestor who is not at least 21 years of
age and been an assiduus (taxpaying) citizen of Nova Roma for at least one year.

VI. Citizens who resign their positions prior to the normal end of their term in
office may not use that position to fulfill any of these requirements,
regardless of how much time they spent in office.

VII. Citizens may run for office prior to the completion of these requirements
but must be in full compliance prior to assuming office and must be an assiduus
(taxpaying) citizen of Nova Roma when announcing their candidacy.

VIII. Any magistrate who resigns from office with three months (119 calendar
days) or less left in their term will lose all century points for that office,
an additional twenty-five century points and be barred from standing for elected
office for two years.

IX. No sitting elected magistrate may present themselves as a candidate for
elected office for the following year. The sole exception shall be a magistrate
suffectus who has served not more than six months (179 calendar days) in their
magistracy as suffectus.

X. This law shall take effect on the Kalends of Ianuarius 2763.

__________________________________________________________

the lex ____________ de eiuratione magistratum

Resignation from any magisterial office takes effect immediately upon an
announcement being made publicly (i.e., on the "Main List") by that magistrate
that they are tendering their resignation. That magistracy is considered vacant
as of the publishing of that announcement, and the vacancy must be filled by an
election within thirty (30) days pursuant to applicable law.

__________________________________________________________

AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

(by deletion)

The sentence "Should one of the ordinarii be found to be derelict
in his duties, that magistrate may be removed by a law originating in the
comitia that elected him." is removed from the Constitution (IV.A)

(by addition)

IV. C. Removal of Magistrates

1. The People may, after being called in comitia, remove an elected
magistrate from power and simultaneously rescind his or her imperium by a vote
of at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the vote of those citizens casting a
valid ballot in a recall election. If a magistrate is removed from office, an
election must be held to fill the office with in thirty (30) calendar days of
the office becoming vacant.

2. upon receiving public request in the Forum (known as the 'Main List') for a
vote on the removal of a magistrate by at least twenty (20) assidui citizens,
any magistrate with the power to do so shall call the People into any
appropriate comitia to allow a vote, even one which would not ordinarily fall
under their jurisdiction; such a call is not subject to veto by any other
magistrate of any rank whatsoever. Failure to do so within one nundinum will be
itself considered a dereliction of duty and may be actionable by appropriate
law.

__________________________________________________________

The lex _________ iudiciaria

1. A citizen (the actor) may exercize their right to bring a lawsuit against any
other citizen (the reus) unless restricted by law [i.e., sitting magistrates or
on a dies nefastus publicus, etc.]. The praetors may either accept or deny a
lawsuit based on its merits as presented by the actor.

2. If the praetors do not accept a citizen's lawsuit, the actor may appeal the
praetor's decision to the consuls. If the consuls refuse to hear it, the actor
may appeal to the People. The People's decision is final.

3. The magistrate who has agreed to hear the lawsuit shall set up whatever
framework he or she thinks best suited for the individual case regarding
submission of evidence and hearing of testimony; the magistrate will then choose
to create a panel of three, five, or seven iudices to hear and render judgement.
All lawsuits shall be heard in a manner that is open to all citizens to observe.

4. Once the case has been heard, the presiding magistrate shall render a
verdict, which shall be announced in the Forum by the presiding magistrate. If
the verdict is not acceptable to the reus, they may appeal to the next highest
ranking magistrates; ultimately, they may appeal to the People. The People's
decision is final.

5. The iudices may not violate Nova Roman or applicable federal, state, or local
laws in rendering judgement. A sentence shall be based on severity of crime;
however, only a vote of the People can banish a citizen.

__________________________________________________________

I have reasons supporting each of these suggestions, either in common sense or
as a means to more closely adhere to ancient Roman practice; for instance, the
consuls never heard law cases except in extreme circumstances and then only when
specifically asked to by the Senate.

Valete,

Cato











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

C. Maria Caeca Gn. Equitio Catoni Senatori Iulio Sabino Censorique S. P. D.

Senator, I admire your direct end succinct language, and find your suggestions of significant merit. I might have quibbles upon further examination, but I think your suggestions are excellent and should receive full and fair consideration. I especially, as I have said before, like the idea of a basic NR law class, especially for those seeking to enter into public office, but for all citizens, as well. While I understand your concerns, Censor, I believe that they can be successfully addressed. Unfortunately there is never a guaranty of total impartiality ...not even in university courses, but ...since the class may be taken more than once, citizens can take it with different instructors, and thus gain a wider perspective, if that is needed.

Vale quam optime,
C. Maria Caeca.

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

SALVE!
 
Your optimism is good and is exactly what NR need. When it comes about legislation it would be nice to include the possibility of what is happen if the things are not going in the proposed direction.
 
VALE,
Sabinus 

"Every individual is the architect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:


From: C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 10:23 PM


 



C. Maria Caeca Gn. Equitio Catoni Senatori Iulio Sabino Censorique S. P. D.

Senator, I admire your direct end succinct language, and find your suggestions of significant merit. I might have quibbles upon further examination, but I think your suggestions are excellent and should receive full and fair consideration. I especially, as I have said before, like the idea of a basic NR law class, especially for those seeking to enter into public office, but for all citizens, as well. While I understand your concerns, Censor, I believe that they can be successfully addressed. Unfortunately there is never a guaranty of total impartiality ...not even in university courses, but ...since the class may be taken more than once, citizens can take it with different instructors, and thus gain a wider perspective, if that is needed.

Vale quam optime,
C. Maria Caeca.

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











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

Cato Iulio Sabino Mariae Caecae omnibusque in foro SPD

I would gladly see any or all of these out in public debate for open and full discussion. None are written in stone under any circumstances, but *all* reflect my desire to cut away the chaff and hone our leges to their essentials, as well as are indicative of how I feel about the items in question :)

Valete,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, iulius sabinus <iulius_sabinus@...> wrote:
>
> SALVE!
>  
> Your optimism is good and is exactly what NR need. When it comes about legislation it would be nice to include the possibility of what is happen if the things are not going in the proposed direction.
>  
> VALE,
> Sabinus 
>
> "Every individual is the architect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius
>
> --- On Fri, 11/26/10, C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 10:23 PM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> C. Maria Caeca Gn. Equitio Catoni Senatori Iulio Sabino Censorique S. P. D.
>
> Senator, I admire your direct end succinct language, and find your suggestions of significant merit. I might have quibbles upon further examination, but I think your suggestions are excellent and should receive full and fair consideration. I especially, as I have said before, like the idea of a basic NR law class, especially for those seeking to enter into public office, but for all citizens, as well. While I understand your concerns, Censor, I believe that they can be successfully addressed. Unfortunately there is never a guaranty of total impartiality ...not even in university courses, but ...since the class may be taken more than once, citizens can take it with different instructors, and thus gain a wider perspective, if that is needed.
>
> Vale quam optime,
> C. Maria Caeca.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

C. Maria Caeca Iulio Sabino Censori sal,

I agree with you, Censor ...laws should include both safeguards and contingencies in case of need, so long as those inclusions don't obscure things, or so complicate the core concept that the law becomes too cumbersome to be effective.

Vale quam optime,
C. Maria Caeca

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

C. Iulius Caesar L. Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.
 
Whoever is successful in the election for praetor will have to, to a large extent, follow the lead and legislative program of the consuls for next year. Praetors do not have a free hand amice, as you know, at implementing a legislative program of their own.
 
That said, what laws do I want to repeal you ask. Any law that is so badly written that it cannot be salvaged without  a total rewrite, any law that is irrelevant to the current and foreseeable circumstances of the res publica, and any law that conflicts with the constitution to a degree that it could not be salvaged without a total rewrite.
 
As to changing laws, the same criteria as above, especially in respect of laws where only a small percentage of the overall law is contradictory.
 
A reasonable time frame is a subjective judgment, which is going to be affected by numerous factors, but if the work is started immediately in January there is no reason that I can see that would prevent the process being completed by December 31st.
 
Now, I am sure for some the burning issue is the fate of the Lex Salicia poenalis and Lex Salicia iudiciaria. Put simply the system they outline has not worked, does not work and will not work, with the degree of universal support necessary for a legal code. The reason being, that on all sides of the spectrum there is recognition that the practical application of trials do not match the expectations of justice and the goals of the drafters.
 
However, having reviewed some suggestions for replacing them, I note that some suggest total abolishment and for others the solution is a simplified trial process. The issue goes deeper than that. I believe it is completely impossible to find citizens that will be widely accepted as neutral in their assessment of the evidence. It doesn't matter if they can be neutral; it is the perception that counts, which influences the level of support for the system.
 
Additionally there are sections of the current leges which it would be absolutely vital to retain if a simplified trail process was adopted, namely temporal limits of Nova Roman authority. That is just one example. Simple and short when constructing a legal code is not necessarily best. leaving the process to be decided by the sitting praetor will without question be a source of dispute, as it was before. The real question is do we need an internal justice system? Add to that, should we even attempt to construct one with such a small population base, where charges of bias will run rampant against those comprising the court?
 
The easy thing to do in response to your question is to produce a shopping list of laws to replace, repeal, but the issues run far deeper than knocking a few unpopular ones off the books, only to discover that the price of popularity is an even bigger mess. Any changes to our legal code have to command near universal support, they need to be well mooted and discussed at all levels, ideally they should be modeled "in action" to see how they perform. It maybe the popular thing to do to stake the legal code, but I as praetor would be obligated to ensure that I didn't promote a popular cause and create a legacy of a huge mess for someone else to have to deal with next year, or in the years to come.
 
So amice, I won't give you your shopping list of laws for the axe, but I will state that if I am elected I will assist immediately in any law reform they undertake, and to give politically neutral and constructive critical comments, and generally assist the process - which must be community based as it is the people's legal system - of review.
 
Optime valete

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:


From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
To: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com" <nova-roma@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 12:23 PM


Ave!

Which laws would you repeal?  Which laws would you change and why?  What
would be a reasonable time frame for repealing those laws you suggested?

Respectfully,

Sulla


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



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

Yahoo! Groups Links





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

Cn. Iulius Caesar L. Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.

<lol> It appears my computer ate the "n" in Cn in my salutation to you. Don't worry, I haven't lost my marbles :)
 
Optime vale

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:


From: Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <gn_iulius_caesar@...>
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 2:20 PM


C. Iulius Caesar L. Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.
 


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

SALVE CATO!
 
I am sure you will sustain your desire with honor. You have my support.
 
VALE,
Sabinus

"Every individual is the architect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, Cato <catoinnyc@...> wrote:


From: Cato <catoinnyc@...>
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 10:49 PM


 



Cato Iulio Sabino Mariae Caecae omnibusque in foro SPD

I would gladly see any or all of these out in public debate for open and full discussion. None are written in stone under any circumstances, but *all* reflect my desire to cut away the chaff and hone our leges to their essentials, as well as are indicative of how I feel about the items in question :)

Valete,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, iulius sabinus <iulius_sabinus@...> wrote:
>
> SALVE!
>  
> Your optimism is good and is exactly what NR need. When it comes about legislation it would be nice to include the possibility of what is happen if the things are not going in the proposed direction.
>  
> VALE,
> Sabinus 
>
> "Every individual is the architect of his own fortune" - Appius Claudius
>
> --- On Fri, 11/26/10, C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 10:23 PM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> C. Maria Caeca Gn. Equitio Catoni Senatori Iulio Sabino Censorique S. P. D.
>
> Senator, I admire your direct end succinct language, and find your suggestions of significant merit. I might have quibbles upon further examination, but I think your suggestions are excellent and should receive full and fair consideration. I especially, as I have said before, like the idea of a basic NR law class, especially for those seeking to enter into public office, but for all citizens, as well. While I understand your concerns, Censor, I believe that they can be successfully addressed. Unfortunately there is never a guaranty of total impartiality ...not even in university courses, but ...since the class may be taken more than once, citizens can take it with different instructors, and thus gain a wider perspective, if that is needed.
>
> Vale quam optime,
> C. Maria Caeca.
>
> [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 Sulla et Salvete omnes;

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Robert Woolwine wrote:
>
> Ave!
>
> Which laws would you repeal? Which laws would you change and why? What
> would be a reasonable time frame for repealing those laws you suggested?
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I am undertaking a self-examination, and am considering tendering a
formal run for the Consulship. I am awaiting Consul Albucius'
advisement and will follow his determination.

However, as I would like to be considered either during this election,
or in the future...

I have long written that we have too many laws for the size of our
current society. Senator Cato rightly points out the Lex Salicia (ad
sum), and the laws on jurisdiction, imperium and magistracies. I
think the upcoming year, perhaps 2 years, to be a period of study,
reflection, re-action and action.

I will admit to not having been interested in the details of our
Tabularium, but to having stared in bewilderment at the volume. I
will own up to ignorance ere now, though fueled more by distraction
due to concerns of home and hearth rather than that of disinterest in
the building and strengthening of our Res Publica.

Though I am neither the most educated nor forceful of intellects, I do
have an ability to read, think and decide. I ask when I don't know,
admit when I'm wrong and offer redress, save in a very few instances
of irreconcilable personal conflict.

Regardless of my condition of candidacy, I shall start reading this
evening our entire Nova Roma Canon, including a full perusal of the
Constitution.

I am in agreement that we need improvements; I've sometimes thought we
need to scrap the entire pile and re-start from the Vedian
Constitution alone. Being incorporated, this does put a majot item in
the way of this full regression, our incorporation charter and
by-laws.

I think that w do not need any Nova Roma laws that replace the
statutes or regulations of our macro-national, multi-national setting.
We do need Nova Roma specific clarification of how we handle the
cultural and legal conflicts, which can arise. We need a system of
internal laws and guidelines that fit both the culture we are striving
to build and the realities of the size of our organization as it
stands now and for the foreseeable future.

I sometimes believe we see ourselves as needing a 16 passenger coach
pulled by a matched team of 6 Percherons, when in reality we can do
with a 2-wheeled cart pulled by a burro.

More when I have refreshed my knowledge and beaten back some of my ignorance.

In amicitia - Venator

Q. Valerius Sullae sal.

My vote is in favor of getting rid of the excessive Roman Republic trappings. I think it's about time we recognize that we're an organization and not a micronation of any sort. Baby steps, people, baby steps.

Vale.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:
>
> Ave!
>
> Which laws would you repeal? Which laws would you change and why? What
> would be a reasonable time frame for repealing those laws you suggested?
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Salve et Salvete Omnes;

As part of my previously stated promise to read our Constitution and
Tabularium, I reviewed the information pages on our upcoming election.

Our honorable Consul P. Memmius Albucius has listed me as a Candidate
for the office of Consul thereon.

I should like to thank him for his consideration, and ask that of the
Cives Nova Roma.

I am not, as I previously stated, either the most educated or forceful
of men. However, I care deeply that Nova Roma not just survive, but
that it grow and thrive to properly Honor my beloved ancestors who are
(I think and believe) of Roman nature.

I am at once a practical man and a romantic, though the latter is a
stronger quality.

Rome for me is much more than a collection of buildings along the
Tiber river, more than its military victories, its engineering
marvels, its language, its Culture, Spirituality, Worldview or
Artistry...

It is a living thing, made up of living beings who share a common goal
of bringing to this modern world of ours that which is good and at
heart within Romanitas and its Virtues, Civic and Private.

I admit to being more visionary than earthbound.

But, perhaps, this is what Nova Roma needs; one consul Earthbound, the
other Not-so-much...two halves of a whole.

My civic record is listed in the Album Civum.
http://www.novaroma.org/civitas/album?id=252

I have performed both well and badly.

I have, however, never sought to leave Nova Roma no matter how things
went in my life outside her borders.

You have questions, I am sure. I will answer.

--
In amicitia et fide
P Ullerius Stephanus Venator
Civis et Poeta

Cn. Iulius Caesar C. Mariae Caecae sal

Since I see you have today declared your candidacy for praetor, maybe you would like to share your own thoughts on the question Sulla posed.

Optime vale

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:

> From: C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 1:23 PM
> C. Maria Caeca Gn. Equitio Catoni
> Senatori Iulio Sabino Censorique S. P. D.
>
> Senator, I admire your direct end succinct language, and

Gn. Iulio Caesari, Senatori, L. Cornelio Sullae Felici Senatori omnibusque in foro S. P. D.

Yes, I have placed my name as a candidate for Praetor, and so, I will certainly respond to this thread.

At the risk of seeming to lack in original thought and creativity, I must agree with you that the mandate of the Praetura is not to propose laws, or to propose their repeal. We do, however, work with the serving Consuls and, I think are more concerned with assisting them, primarily by maintaining the Tabularium in good order, and in making sure it is accessible and relatively easy to use. So, no, I don't have a list of laws I'd like to see repealed, or even amended. I *would* like to see a truly in depth study, to be begun immediately, which would carefully examine every law (yes, all of them), to determine the following:
1. that they are in compliance with all applicable macronational laws and regulations, both Federal and in the State of Maine, where we hold our incorporation, *or* at least that they are not, for some reason, demonstrably illegal.

2. that each law is clear, understandable, and is not in conflict with other laws or pertinent legal instruments in or outside of the Res Publica.

I would also like to see a complete and careful of the constitution, to determine the same things, and to determine if amendments are needed or language revised.

I do no see this as something that can be done in a few weeks or even a few months. Frankly, I suspect this may well be a multi year project, but if we begin immediately, and work diligently and steadily, it is also an achievable project. By mean, I do not, necessarily mean the Praetura ...our primary functions are, I believe, administrative rather than legislative. However, if elected Praetor, it would be one of my highest priorities to help facilitate this process.

Valete quam optime,
C. Maria Caeca

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

Cn. Iulius Caesar C. Mariae Caecae sal

Excellent. I had seen your name as a candidate for Rogator, then the next time I looked, as a candidate for Praetor.

Of course as I said the legal code, the whole concept of trials, disputes on this list will likely consume the winning candidates as they always have. I for one am interested in what you propose, if anything, as a solution to the clearly controversial trial process.

For example, what will your position be, if you were to win, on a petitio presented to your colleague. What would you expect from your colleague and what test would you apply to the petitio and what frameworks would your opening edicts take in respect of the trial process?

Until something replaces, if indeed it ever does, the current trial process, well the theoretical model, the praetors will have to contend with possible prosecutions. Who knows how the remainder of the year plays out in the aftermath of the coup attempt, and what the fall out next year will be. Concordia seems to be increasing in some quarters, but if you as a praetor were presented with a series of petitios charging a number of citizens with treason, what could the citizen body expect of your legal analysis? What would it be critical in your opinion to establish legally in the petitio?

I am interested, because who knows who might win, so it is concievable you and I might end up with this in our laps. What can I expect of you in respect of your legal analysis? Time may not be on the side of the winning candidates in this respect so it would be good to know these things in advance.

Optime vale.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> Gn. Iulio Caesari, Senatori, L. Cornelio Sullae Felici Senatori omnibusque in foro S. P. D.
>
> Yes, I have placed my name as a candidate for Praetor, and so, I will certainly respond to this thread.

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

Now that I have answered the direct question posed by Senator sulla, I want
to say some other things, so that you, the People of NR can understand me,
my motivations and my skills better.

I do not pretend to legal expertise. I have no legal training, but I do
offer many years of life experience, an ability to read critically, and a
wide range of interests that have led me to read fairly deeply in several
areas, including history, statecraft, Government, and yes, even a bit of lay
legal matters. this makes me nothing but a relatively well informed
individual, but I do have other skills, which I think will be beneficial in
the Praetura. I am confident, though, because the other candidates *do*
have these more specialized skills, and in one case, impressive and
extensive credentials. Luckily, there are 2 Praetors, which means that if I
am elected, I will be able to rely, in perfect confidence on my colleague in
such matters, and will more than likely follow his lead in these things. In
return, I would hope that my colleague would recognize and trust my skill
sets which happen to be in dealing effectively with people, and in list
management. In short, I am heartily glad that there are *2* Praetors, and
that I will have the luxury of being able to rely for guidance in legal
matters on any of the candidates who are currently running for this
position.

Cura ut valeas,
Valete Bene,
C. Maria Caeca

Ave!

So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for Praetor then?

Vale,

Sulla

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:53 PM, C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>wrote:

>
>
> C. Maria Caeca omnibus in foro S. P. D.
>
> Now that I have answered the direct question posed by Senator sulla, I want
>
> to say some other things, so that you, the People of NR can understand me,
> my motivations and my skills better.
>
> I do not pretend to legal expertise. I have no legal training, but I do
> offer many years of life experience, an ability to read critically, and a
> wide range of interests that have led me to read fairly deeply in several
> areas, including history, statecraft, Government, and yes, even a bit of
> lay
> legal matters. this makes me nothing but a relatively well informed
> individual, but I do have other skills, which I think will be beneficial in
>
> the Praetura. I am confident, though, because the other candidates *do*
> have these more specialized skills, and in one case, impressive and
> extensive credentials. Luckily, there are 2 Praetors, which means that if I
>
> am elected, I will be able to rely, in perfect confidence on my colleague
> in
> such matters, and will more than likely follow his lead in these things. In
>
> return, I would hope that my colleague would recognize and trust my skill
> sets which happen to be in dealing effectively with people, and in list
> management. In short, I am heartily glad that there are *2* Praetors, and
> that I will have the luxury of being able to rely for guidance in legal
> matters on any of the candidates who are currently running for this
> position.
>
> Cura ut valeas,
> Valete Bene,
> C. Maria Caeca
>
>
>


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

Cn. Iulius Caesar C. Mariae Caecae sal

Sadly I must disagree with your perception that you can rely on your colleague. you cannot, you must not, rely on your colleague's legal interpretation. You are not some second fiddle in the legal analysis process, and you must never trust your colleague to get it right. The whole concept of dual magistracies is predicated on the principle of one colleague with the power of veto acting as a check.

I'll be as blunt as I normally am, and I have no doubt would expect nothing less, but if you are going to abrogate your responsibility Caeca and trust my judgement for example, then you will be failing in your duty. No prateor worth his or her salt should expect the other praetor to simply follow their lead. What happens if I send a citizen for trial, and I am in error? If you don't quickly gain at least the rudimentary skills necessary to identify that error, you will fail the citizen, you fail me as your colleague and you fail Nova Roma. We had this year one praetor basically running her own show unchecked. That was a disaster in every sense. So no, I am sorry you cannot and must not follow your colleagues lead.

Optime vale

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "C.Maria Caeca" <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:
>
> C. Maria Caeca omnibus in foro S. P. D.
>
> Now that I have answered the direct question posed by Senator sulla, I want
> to say some other things, so that you, the People of NR can understand me,
> my motivations and my skills better.
>
> I do not pretend to legal expertise. I have no legal training, but I do
> offer many years of life experience, an ability to read critically, and a
> wide range of interests that have led me to read fairly deeply in several
> areas, including history, statecraft, Government, and yes, even a bit of lay
> legal matters. this makes me nothing but a relatively well informed
> individual, but I do have other skills, which I think will be beneficial in
> the Praetura. I am confident, though, because the other candidates *do*
> have these more specialized skills, and in one case, impressive and
> extensive credentials. Luckily, there are 2 Praetors, which means that if I
> am elected, I will be able to rely, in perfect confidence on my colleague in
> such matters, and will more than likely follow his lead in these things. In
> return, I would hope that my colleague would recognize and trust my skill
> sets which happen to be in dealing effectively with people, and in list
> management. In short, I am heartily glad that there are *2* Praetors, and
> that I will have the luxury of being able to rely for guidance in legal
> matters on any of the candidates who are currently running for this
> position.
>
> Cura ut valeas,
> Valete Bene,
> C. Maria Caeca
>

C. Maria Caeca Cn. Iulio Caesari Senatori S. P. D.

Actually, I have given this matter considerable thought. As I said, I am no legal expert, but I can do research as well as anyone, and I have excellent reading comprehension, so, should I receive a petitio, here, I hope coherently, is what you, as my potential colleague cold expect from me.

1. A thorough, complete and unbiased examination of, and assessment of, the petitio to determine if, in fact, there are grounds for a case to be accepted. I will say now, and say as firmly as I can, that as the administrators of the legal system, Praetors *MUST* put aside *ANY* personal inclinations, likes or dislikes, and make their determinations based on our current laws (including, of course, the constitution), and at least internally, *only* on those laws. If there are issues which would involve either Federal or State of Maine laws and regulations, these *must* be taken into account and, in fact, given priority. Usually, though, I think we would be dealing with internal laws.

2. If the petitio meets all requirements, and I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that there is, in fact, grounds for a case, I will continue the process, as required, again without favoritism to either side or prejudice against either side.

3. My edicta would be statements relevant to the case, and that alone, and contain no extraneous material, particularly material concerning any opinions I may or may not have, as they are irrelevant and would be inappropriate.

4. It is the duty of the presiding Praetor to *administer* the trial, and that means to ensure that all parties act in accordance with our laws and requirements, that evidence is presented correctly, that each side has a full and fair chance to present their entire case, and then to provide instructions to the iudices which will enable them to make the most fair judgments. I would not even consider going beyond this, for example, suggesting to judges what they *should* find, or trying to intervene in the deliberations of the iudices. the only way I would question a judgment of the iudices in a case would be if that judgment was clearly in conflict with existing laws, and then only to make them aware of that conflict, and request that they return to their deliberations and resolve the conflict.

If you were the trial administrator, you could expect from me any help I could give you, including necessary research, the handling of minor administrative tasks, and, should such a trial take all of you energy and attention, you could be confident that the other duties of the Praetura would be attended to, and that the Praetura would run smoothly.

Vale quam optime,
C. Maria Caeca
And yes, I decided to remove my name from he candidacy of Rogatrix and offer myself as a candidate for Praetor, for several reasons, no the least of which is frankly, that I think I can do an excellent job, that I firmly believe that this year's government heeds those citizens who will work for compromise when possible, but always calmly, rationally, intelligently, and effectively. We have had enough drama to last us for a *very* long time, and I am presumptuous enough to think I can offer these things to the Res Publica. Also, I had thought that I had to serve as Curule Aedile before I could serve as Praetor, and found out only recently that was not the case ...so I reevaluated the role I wish to play in our public life, and he possible contributions I could make ...and acted according to my conclusions.

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

Caeca Caesar sal,

You are absolutely correct, and I did not phrase that carefully enough. When I say that I would rely on another's expertise, that does not mean that I would simply do so, without doing my research and coming to my own conclusions. I certainly will, and if I have issues with my colleague, I will make them known, and quickly and carefully. and yes, I have seen what happens when the collegial checks and balances are not present or not functioning, and would never allow that. As you say, I will have some work to do, and quickly, but respect for the expertise of others is neither complete reliance, dependency, nor blind obedience.

Vale Bene,
C.M.C.

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

Ave!

No one has, or could, convince me to do anything. I make my own decisions,
and take full responsibility for them, and for what I do.

Vale Bene,
C. Maria Caeca

Cato Iulio Caesari omnibusque in foro SPD

Caesar, I find this particularly important:

"The real question is do we need an internal justice system? Add to that, should we even attempt to construct one with such a small population base, where charges of bias will run rampant against those
comprising the court?"

A very good question indeed.

There will be conflict. We know that, and I have, when speaking about the Forum, expressed some of the reasons I think that conflict is a natural element of human interaction. I do not think that future conflict(s) need rise to the level we have seen recently. But it will occur.

Even in the macronational world the idea that a jury will be totally indifferent or impartial is understood to be somewhat tenuous; what we need to do, given our situation vis-a-vis size and scope, is pare it down to its essential parts.

The only reason I can find that satisfies myself with regards to the question of the necessity of an internal procedure is that we either set up some sort of procedure that involves the citizenry or we leave it up to the praetors (or consuls) to decide matters of conflict.

We could, I imagine, simply make it an appeal-based system; if the praetors or consuls announce that they are punishing someone for something, the recipient of that punishment should be able to appeal to the People; the idea of provocatio is enshrined with good reason in the Constitution. An appeal is heard, the People vote, and done.

Valete,

Cato

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

Now that I have answered the direct question posed by Senator sulla, I want
to say some other things, so that you, the People of NR can understand me,
my motivations and my skills better.

I do not pretend to legal expertise. I have no legal training, but I do
offer many years of life experience, an ability to read critically, and a
wide range of interests that have led me to read fairly deeply in several
areas, including history, statecraft, Government, and yes, even a bit of lay
legal matters. this makes me nothing but a relatively well informed
individual, but I do have other skills, which I think will be beneficial in
the Praetura. I am confident, though, because the other candidates *do*
have these more specialized skills, and in one case, impressive and
extensive credentials. Luckily, there are 2 Praetors, which means that if I
am elected, I will be able to rely, in perfect confidence on my colleague in
such matters, and will more than likely follow his lead in these things. In
return, I would hope that my colleague would recognize and trust my skill
sets which happen to be in dealing effectively with people, and in list
management. In short, I am heartily glad that there are *2* Praetors, and
that I will have the luxury of being able to rely for guidance in legal
matters on any of the candidates who are currently running for this
position.

Cura ut valeas,
Valete Bene,
C. Maria Caeca








-----Original Message-----
From: C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, Nov 26, 2010 7:53 pm
Subject: [Nova-Roma] a few personal commnts, if I may?




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

Now that I have answered the direct question posed by Senator sulla, I want
to say some other things, so that you, the People of NR can understand me,
my motivations and my skills better.

I do not pretend to legal expertise. I have no legal training, but I do
offer many years of life experience, an ability to read critically, and a
wide range of interests that have led me to read fairly deeply in several
areas, including history, statecraft, Government, and yes, even a bit of lay
legal matters. this makes me nothing but a relatively well informed
individual, but I do have other skills, which I think will be beneficial in
the Praetura. I am confident, though, because the other candidates *do*
have these more specialized skills, and in one case, impressive and
extensive credentials. Luckily, there are 2 Praetors, which means that if I
am elected, I will be able to rely, in perfect confidence on my colleague in
such matters, and will more than likely follow his lead in these things. In
return, I would hope that my colleague would recognize and trust my skill
sets which happen to be in dealing effectively with people, and in list
management. In short, I am heartily glad that there are *2* Praetors, and
that I will have the luxury of being able to rely for guidance in legal
matters on any of the candidates who are currently running for this
position.

Cura ut valeas,
Valete Bene,
C. Maria Caeca







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

Actually, I have given this matter considerable thought. As I said, I am no legal expert, but I can do research as well as anyone, and I have excellent reading comprehension, so, should I receive a petitio, here, I hope coherently, is what you, as my potential colleague cold expect from me.






Q. Fabius Maximus SPD

Salvete

Alas. That is exactly what is wrong with Nova Roma. No, none of us here are competent to judge anyone. There is too much partisan friendships. Past examples are proof of that.

Protection under the law is a legal fiction. We had a director of our own BoD refuse to carry out legal instructions in violation of Maine law.
What happened to him? Nothing. Why? Because his friends wouldn't allow it. Where was the protection for NR BoD under Maine law?

Think about this. His friends wouldn't allow it. That's justice? The Republic is halted because it easier nay handier to ignore laws that prevent people
from doing what they want to do, because they justify it for the good of the state.

The state in this case is Nova Roma. And since Rome is built on laws, citizens obeying those laws is paramount. So here at Nova Roma the continuation of the Roman Republic we attempted to fabricate a law system. But, that cannot happen here. Why? Consider.
Everybody here is a volunteer. Everyone citizen in Rome was there, because happenstance forced them to be there. If someone broke the law in Rome, there was legal machinery of the courts in place to punish or forgive them. Of course the Equites who sat on the Jury were human, and they were subject to human frailties. And I'm sure many an innocent person was condemned because Equites were bribed, or didn't like the family, or just didn't like the man.

That's not the case here. No one is forcing anybody to submit to punishment. Why? Because you fine people are here, voluntarily. You can leave anytime. And because there is no punitive clause in our constitution, you can come back at anytime.

So, if you have enough friends in high places you can either ignore laws that don't suit you or if you don't have friends, leave and return later, when the political cilimate is better.
I thought Liva summed up very well. When her "people" have regained power, those who fled will return. And nothing can be done to stop it. So what does that mean? People in power must hold on to that power to keep the others from returning.

So there you have it. Laws here are illusions. They sound nice, but because there is no real teeth, to them, they are shadows with no substance.

The only way a law system would work here was if the prospective citizen swore an oath on becoming a Nova Roma citizen that they would submit to a magistrate's higher authority at all times. To protect the citizens from punitive magistrates of course there is the Tribunate. But what if the Tribunate is friendly to the Government, or don't like the person? Yes, you see the problem. Without assurances from the citizens, this system is unworkable. But also, such an oath is illegal in non profit organizations.

Believe it or not, we here in Nova Roma do have a rules that must be obeyed. Those are the ones set down in in the Internet provider that gives us our forum. It is called the Terms of Service and they are pretty succinct. Our Nova Roma law system should be based on these. True none of them do not have Latin names but I believe that they can be made to fit. And they are legal. Citizens say that they will follow these rules when subscribe, and failure to follow them means they are terminated. In Rome that would be called banishment.

The lex Sallica is not needed. It must be repealed since it has cost Nova Roma more members then any abrasve personalities or religious disagreements.

I'm Q. Fabius Maximus, former Consul, Praetor, Aedile Curule, Quaestor and Paterfamilias and founder of Gens Fabia. I am standing for Praetor. I do this because I believe Nova Roma's law system is broken. And I believe I can repair it.

Thank you for listening




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

Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.

>>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for Praetor then? <<<

LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts in their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she can at this time be more useful in serving our community.

So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house when I discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then new information to me, as well as to them.

I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if she would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but I, and everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage and dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in service to our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute the best. That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the other candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.

Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my friend Maria Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent magistrate and a person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to do sacrifice one year of her life in a position which she does not want, and as it seems, I even failed in my efforts to deter her.

But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only thing I can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into the confidence of the voters.

Salvete omnes

In the course of looking for something else, I came across this site:-


http://www.arlt.co.uk/about_us.php

There are a variety of interesting pages on the site, including a Latin newspaper.

(Previously posted to the Britannia mailing list)

Valete omnes

Crispus

Cato omnibus in foro SPD

Hodiernus dies est ante diem V Kalendas Decembris; hic dies fastus est.

"The cavalry force, riding in perfect order, charged the enemy whilst
scattered and hampered by their plunder and filled the whole place
with carnage. Incapable of either resistance or flight they were cut
down amongst the packages which they had thrown away and over which
their startled horses were stumbling. After almost annihilating the
enemy's cavalry, M. Fabius led his cavalry by a short circuit round
the main battle and attacked the Samnite infantry from behind. The
fresh shouting which arose in that direction threw them into a panic,
and when the Dictator saw the men in front looking round, the
standards getting into confusion, and the whole line wavering, he
called upon his men and encouraged them to fresh efforts; he appealed
to the military tribunes and first centurions by name to join him in
renewing the fight. They again raised the battle-shout and pressed
forward, and wherever they advanced they saw more and more
demoralisation amongst the enemy. The cavalry were now within view of
those in front, and Cornelius, turning round to his maniples,
indicated as well as he could by voice and hand that he recognised the
standards and bucklers of his own cavalry. No sooner did they see and
hear them than, forgetting the toil and travail they had endured for
almost a whole day, forgetting their wounds, and as eager as though
they had just emerged fresh from their camp after receiving the signal
for battle, they flung themselves on the enemy. The Samnites could no
longer bear up against the terrible onset of the cavalry behind them
and the fierce charge of the infantry in front. A large number were
killed between the two, many were scattered in flight. The infantry
accounted for those who were hemmed in and stood their ground, the
cavalry created slaughter among the fugitives; amongst those killed
was their commander-in-chief.

This battle completely broke down the resistance; so much so that in
all their councils peace was advocated. It could not, they said, be a
matter of surprise that they met with no success in an unblest war,
undertaken in defiance of treaty obligations, where the gods were more
justly incensed against them than men. That war would have to be
expiated and atoned for at a great cost. The only question was whether
they should pay the penalty by sacrificing the few who were guilty or
shedding the innocent blood of all. Some even went so far as to name
the instigators of the war. One name, especially, was generally
denounced, that of Brutulus Papius. He was an aristocrat and possessed
great influence, and there was not a shadow of doubt that it was he
who had brought about the breach of the recent truce. The praetors
found themselves compelled to submit a decree which the council
passed, ordering Brutulus Papius to be surrendered and all the
prisoners and booty taken from the Romans to be sent with him to Rome,
and further that the redress which the fetials had demanded in
accordance with treaty-rights should be made as law and justice
demanded. Brutulus escaped the ignominy and punishment which awaited
him by a voluntary death, but the decree was carried out; the fetials
were sent to Rome with the dead body, and all his property was
surrendered with him. None of this, however, was accepted by the
Romans beyond the prisoners and whatever articles amongst the spoil
were identified by the owners; so far as anything else was concerned,
the surrender was fruitless. The senate decreed a triumph for the
Dictator." - Livy, History of Rome 8.39



"Up to the present I have not obtained from any poet the same artistic
delight as was given me from the first by a Horatian ode. In certain
languages that which is obtained here cannot even be hoped for. The
mosaic of words in which every word, by sound, by position and by
meaning, diffuses its force right, left and over the whole, that
minimum in the compass and number of signs, that maximum thus realized
in their energy,--all that is Roman, and if you will believe me, it is
noble par excellence. All other poetry becomes somewhat too popular in
comparison with it - mere sentimental loquacity." - Friederich
Nietzsche, "Twilight of the Idols"

"Tu ne quaesieris, scire nefas, quem mihi, quem tibi
finem di dederint, Leuconoe, nec Babylonios
temptaris numeros. ut melius, quicquid erit, pati,
seu pluris hiemes seu tribuit Iuppiter ultimam,
quae nunc oppositis debilitat pumicibus mare
Tyrrhenum: sapias, uina liques, et spatio breui
spem longam reseces. dum loquimur, fugerit inuida
aetas: carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

(Don't ask [it's forbidden to know] what final fate the gods have
given to me and you, Leuconoe, and don't consult Babylonian
horoscopes. How much better it is to accept whatever shall be,
whether Iuppiter has given many more winters or whether this is the
last one, which now breaks the force of the Tuscan sea against the
facing cliffs. Be wise, strain the wine, and trim distant hope within
short limits. While we're talking, grudging time will already
have fled: seize the day, trusting as little as possible in tomorrow)
- Horace, Odes 1.11


"Laetus in praesens animus quod ultra est
oderit curare, et amara lento
temperet risu: nihil est ab omni
parte beatum."

(Let the mind which is happy in the present
refuse to concern itself with what's beyond, and
let it soften what's harsh with a quiet smile:
nothing is perfect from every angle.) - Horace, Odes 2.16


"Quid sit futurum cras fuge quaerere, et
quem fors dierum cumque dabit lucro
adpone, nec dulcis amores
sperne puer neque tu choreas..."

(Leave off asking what tomorrow will bring, and
whatever days fortune will give, count them
as profit, and while you're young don't scorn
sweet love affairs and dances...) - Horace, Odes 1.19


On this day in 8 B.C., the poet Horace died. Quintus Horatius
Flaccus, known in English as Horace, was born at Venusia, near the
border of Apulia, in 65 B.C. His father, a former slave who had freed
himself before the birth of his son, sent him to school in Rome. As a
young man Horace went to Athens and studied philosophy at the famous
schools. When the Civil War broke out he enlisted in the army of
Brutus, served at Philippi, and came back to Rome not long after.
Deprived of his property as a result of the proscriptions, he began
life anew at the age of twenty-four as a clerk in a public office. Not
long after, he attracted the attention of Maecenas, and soon became
acquainted with Varius and Vergil, henceforth devoting himself to
literary pursuits. His first work, the first book of Satires, was
published in 35 B.C. About a year later, Maecenas presented him with
the celebrated Sabine Farm, and Horace was at liberty to the end of
his life to do as he liked. Before he died he was famous: the Emperor
Augustus commissioned him to write the fourth book of Odes.


Valete bene!

Cato

Ex officio Tribunorum Plebis.

As less than five (5) candidates for Tribunes or two (2) candidates for Plebeian Aediles have announced their candidacies today, a. d. V. Kal. Decembres (Nov. 27th), I remind you that the deadline of the candidacies is tomorrow:
Solis dies a. d. IV Kal. Decembres,
Sunday 28 November 2763/2010.

A second call for Candidates is hereby issued for the offices of Tribuni Plebis and Aediles Plebis.
The elected candidates will have their terms of office begin AVC 2763 a.d. IV Idus Dec. (10 December 2010).

Any and all Assidui Plebeian Citizens who wish to serve the Respublica and the People for the next year shall:
( I ) declare their candidacy to the current Tribuni Plebis at the email address:
jfarnoud94ATyahooDOTfr
and
( II ) announce their intention to run for office before the Comitia Plebis Tributa:
ComitiaPlebisTributa@yahoogroups.com

Announcements of candidacy for these offices that are made to any other official Nova Roma lists are allowed but will not meet the requirements
needed to be recognized as a candidate.

*All who seek candidacy MUST post their announcement to the Comitia Plebis Tributa.*

According to the Constitution and the laws:
-Lex Iunia de magistratuum aetate
-Lex Vedia de magistratuum aetate
-Lex Vedia de cursu honorum

Eligibility Requirements:
Tribunus Plebis - (V positions available) -
Candidates must be Cives in good standing for at least six full months before taking office; members of the Plebeian Ordo, Assidui today (12
Nov. 2010), and at least 25 years of age by AUC MMDCCLXIII a.d. IV Idus Dec (10 Dec 2010).

Aedilis Plebis - (II positions available) -
Candidates must be Cives in good standing for at least six full months before taking office; members of the Plebeian Ordo, Assidui and at least 21 years of age by AUC MMDCCLXIII a.d. IV Idus Dec (10 Dec. 2010).

Time Limits for Declaring Candidacy:
Announcements of candidacy before the Comitia Plebis Tributa and declaration of candidacy to the Tribuni Plebis must be received no later than
23.59 CET 28 Nov (before midnight at Rome being 6:00 p.m. EDT or 3:00 p.m. PDT) AUC MMDCCLXIII (2010 Gregorian).

Datum sub manu mea ante diem Quintum Kalendas Decembres P. Memmio Albucio K. Fabio Buteone Quintiliano iterum consulibus, anno Vrbis conditae MMDCCLXIII.

C. Petronius Dexter
Tribunus Plebis Arcoiali scribebat
a. d. V kal. Decembres P. Memmio K. Fabio II coss.

Tribuni Plebis
C. Petronius Dexter
M. Octavius Corvus
C. Aquillius Rota

Aedilis Plebis
Vibia Rutilia Enodiaria



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

Salve et Salvete:


I'm not exactly sure what picture is attempted at being painted here,but as
of one of those "2 individuals" who were told such news. Honestly I
believed you Lentulus, I had every ounce of confidence you would deter Caeca
as you so gallantly stated. Since she has declared her intention which is
still slightly bewildering, Caeca has a been a friend to us both let us
simply congratulate and wish her the best of luck.


And by the way Lentule, if I had never known anything about this, I too
would've assumed you had a hand in influencing Caeca's decision(and I say
this NOT to insult you), so I can see how Sulla would've came up with the
same conclusion.

There the air of suspicion is cleared a bit, I'm not sure how anyone else is
feeling but a "lets-point-the-finger" game doesn't sound actually productive
at this time.

Vale et Valete,
Aeternia



On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:

>
>
> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
>
>
> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for Praetor
> then? <<<
>
> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a
> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts in
> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she can at
> this time be more useful in serving our community.
>
> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat
> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house when I
> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then new
> information to me, as well as to them.
>
> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if she
> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but I, and
> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage and
> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in service to
> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute the best.
> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the other
> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
>
> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my friend Maria
> Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent magistrate and a
> person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to do sacrifice
> one year of her life in a position which she does not want, and as it seems,
> I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
>
> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only thing I
> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into the
> confidence of the voters.
>
>
>

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

Lentulus Aeterniae sal.


Just a last answer, short and quick:

> And by the way Lentule, if I had never known anything about
> this, I too
> would've assumed you had a hand in influencing Caeca's
> decision(and I say
> this NOT to insult you), so I can see how Sulla would've
> came up with the
> same conclusion.

I could see and I could figure out his idea imagined behind the story, but no; this is not how it happened. And it would have been nicer from him to ask than presuming and assuming inexact things.

And to be absolutely clear and honest: Maria Caeca shared her thoughts about this candidacy with me on Thanksgiving day, and I almost immediately talked about this with M. Cornelius Gualterus Graecus and later with you. Maria Caeca and I talked, and my role in this talking was that of the "advocatus diaboli", which means, I tried to call her attention to the dangers of this office, but at the end of the discussion, it was me who had to realize and confess she was a very brave and courageous woman, and I can say anything, once she is convinced that what she does is the right thing to do, one has little chance to deter her from the path of serving the community for what she has a well-known flagrant love and dedication.

> There the air of suspicion is cleared a bit, I'm not sure
> how anyone else is
> feeling but a "lets-point-the-finger" game doesn't sound
> actually productive
> at this time.

Exactly! Let's then focus from now on what each of the candidates can offer, and not on such questions like who are their friends' friends or what are their supposed reasons to be willingness to serve the community.

I wish we have more and more candidates, who are like Caeca, and who are equally determined and willing to work and do for the communty: for us.

Let's hear...... The Candidates! :)

Aeternia Lentulo sal:


It's going to be one of those days I take it, you can view my comments
below.

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:

>
>
> Lentulus Aeterniae sal.
>
> Just a last answer, short and quick:
>
>
> > And by the way Lentule, if I had never known anything about
> > this, I too
> > would've assumed you had a hand in influencing Caeca's
> > decision(and I say
> > this NOT to insult you), so I can see how Sulla would've
> > came up with the
> > same conclusion.
>
> I could see and I could figure out his idea imagined behind the story, but
> no; this is not how it happened. And it would have been nicer from him to
> ask than presuming and assuming inexact things.
>

Aeternia: I agree tact could have been displayed, but do I even have to say
it... It's Sulla come now...

>
> And to be absolutely clear and honest: Maria Caeca shared her thoughts
> about this candidacy with me on Thanksgiving day, and I almost immediately
> talked about this with M. Cornelius Gualterus Graecus and later with you.
> Maria Caeca and I talked, and my role in this talking was that of the
> "advocatus diaboli", which means, I tried to call her attention to the
> dangers of this office, but at the end of the discussion, it was me who had
> to realize and confess she was a very brave and courageous woman, and I can
> say anything, once she is convinced that what she does is the right thing to
> do, one has little chance to deter her from the path of serving the
> community for what she has a well-known flagrant love and dedication.
>
>

Aeternia: Yes she is, there should be a 100 Caeca's to fill Nova Roma...

> > There the air of suspicion is cleared a bit, I'm not sure
> > how anyone else is
> > feeling but a "lets-point-the-finger" game doesn't sound
> > actually productive
> > at this time.
>
> Exactly! Let's then focus from now on what each of the candidates can
> offer, and not on such questions like who are their friends' friends or what
> are their supposed reasons to be willingness to serve the community.
>

Aeternia: I had to make an attempt to clear the air as it were Lentule, this
is an e-mail list, not in the scenario of us having Hot Cocoa and Tiramisu
idly chatting about it. Assumptions often get made you know this just as
well as I do, so yes in Aeternia's own way I attempted to nip this. I would
agree with you everyone has their own reasons of why they want to serve the
community, although in this case I don't exactly understand Madam Caeca's
reasons for the Praetura, I certainly as a close friend without any reserve
will respect her decision, and be emotional support if she needs it.
Because I know without doubt she would do the same for me regarding my own
Candidacy, it is simply what friends do of course :-)

>
> I wish we have more and more candidates, who are like Caeca, and who are
> equally determined and willing to work and do for the communty: for us.
>
> Aeternia: I agree that's why I think we should clone her like a 100 times

(lol).

> Let's hear...... The Candidates! :)
>

Aeternia: What you said :)

>
>
>

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

Cn. Iulius Caesar C. Mariae Caecae sal

Thank you for the clarification. The fact remains that your first response was to suggest that you would adopt a secondary role. In my experience a person's first response is usually the most genuine, when "genuine" is used in the sense of instinctive, rather than a measure of truth or honesty.

My concerns are simple, and I am going to lay them out, for after all if this is to be an election and not the usual rubber stamp process, why not? Despite Lentulus trying to hurry people along from such matters, there are some questions remaining unanswered. In fact the more pressure that is applied to move on from this matter, the more that some will start to conclude there is no smoke without fire.

It is clear to all that you appear an exceptionally friendly and nice person. You no doubt fulfill your scribal role in the censors office to the fullest. You are always ready to assist new citizens on the newroman list and elsewhere. You perform the role of assistant, scribe etc. perfectly.

Set against those laudable qualities is the fact that you elected not to gain some direct experience of first managing a cohors by running for one of the Aedile positions, and instead chose to run for praetor. To be exact you first stood for Rogator, then switched, almost in the eleventh hour.

Now of course anyone qualified in years and prior offices held can run for office and given the current composition of the centuries and the legacy of years of people collecting century points in various non-citizen elected positions combined with a few elected positions, together with a low population base, has produced an exceptionally limited electorate where just the top twenty centuries reflect factional success at seeding people rather than a vibrant thriving electorate.

So what does that mean for this election? Much like others that the decision could well be decided by relatuvely a few citizens who have obviously thrown their lot in with one faction or another. Therefore you stand a good chance of being elected, hence why understanding what underpins this decision of yours is important.

So your sudden leap out of the relative obscurity of the Rogator position into the political fray, much to the, apparent, consternation of your friend Lentulus, seems to suggest that you made a choice not out of a simple desire to serve.

Given your lack of experience so far, your instinctive reliance on the judgement of others, and the fact that there were already candidates for the praetorship (it wasn't as though you reluctantly stepped into standing for an office that had no candidates) leads me to conclude that your candidacy for praetor is less about service to the res publica, for there were other options to serve in a capacity which you would certainly have excelled in, and more about representing an opposing viewpoint.

Did you Caeca feel compelled to stand to provide opposition or a check to some or all of the rest of your co-candidates? I for one as one of those candidates would rather you were just honest enough to lay it out on the table. Something doesn't add up here; this does not seem just about service to the res publica.

Win or lose however the result of this election is important to me. We endured a large part of this year with an absent praetor and the remaining one running amok. We need to avoid the mess we got into this year, even if this year it comes from inexperience rather than sheer lunatic behavior. It would also be a good thing, should you win, for your colleague to know in advance areas which you disagree with them or take issue, be it in attitudes or policies.

So as they say Caeca, I think it is a good time for you to put the elephant on the table.

Optime vale

--- On Fri, 11/26/10, C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...> wrote:

> From: C.Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: a few personal commnts, if I may?
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 9:43 PM
> Caeca Caesar sal,
>
> You are absolutely correct, and I did not phrase that
> carefully enough.  When I say that I would rely on
> another's expertise, that does not mean that I would simply
> do so, without doing my research and coming to my own
> conclusions.  I certainly will, and if I have issues
> with my colleague, I will make them known, and quickly and
> carefully.  and yes, I have seen what happens when the
> collegial checks and balances are not present or not
> functioning, and would never allow that.  As you say, I
> will have some work to do, and quickly, but respect for the
> expertise of others is neither complete reliance,
> dependency, nor blind obedience.
>
> Vale Bene,
> C.M.C.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     Nova-Roma-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>

Salve et salvete,

I would advocate for the immediate repealing of the following laws:

Salicia iudiciaria
Salicia poenalis
Popillia senatoria
Curiatia Iulia de tributo virginum vestalium


And the modification of the following:

Moravia de suffragiis in comitiis plebis tributis et ratione comitiorum plebis tributorum (remove section 8)

Lex Arminia de fovenda lingua latina (remove section 3, modify 4)

Lex Minucia Moravia de civitate eiuranda (simplify the whole thing)

Lex Octavia altera de comitiis centuriatis (reduce minimum century limit)

Lex Cornelia Iunia de definitione intervallorum magistratuum (clarify language)

Vale et valete,

Gualterus Graecus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:
>
> Ave!
>
> Which laws would you repeal? Which laws would you change and why? What
> would be a reasonable time frame for repealing those laws you suggested?
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Ave!

I have two things to say:

1 - One doth protest too much. I think based on your response we all know
you had a role in Caeca declaring her candidacy. Your own protest on
protest on protest just leads to that conclusion.

2. I am reminded of a speech given by Richard Nixon....the moment I read
this, it was a famous speech...where he admitted wrong doing but pulled the
heart strings at the same time. That speech is the Checkers Speech.

part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4UEv_jjPL0
part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhQD2UFCIbY

You do Nixon proud Lentulus.

Vale,

Sulla

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:

>
>
> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
>
>
> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for Praetor
> then? <<<
>
> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a
> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts in
> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she can at
> this time be more useful in serving our community.
>
> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat
> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house when I
> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then new
> information to me, as well as to them.
>
> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if she
> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but I, and
> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage and
> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in service to
> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute the best.
> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the other
> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
>
> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my friend Maria
> Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent magistrate and a
> person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to do sacrifice
> one year of her life in a position which she does not want, and as it seems,
> I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
>
> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only thing I
> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into the
> confidence of the voters.
>
>
>

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

Ave,

I did forget to add one other thing. We had one vestal run for office and we
know exactly how that turned out. Do we really need to do down this road
again?

Vale,

Sulla

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...

> wrote:

> Ave!
>
> I have two things to say:
>
> 1 - One doth protest too much. I think based on your response we all know
> you had a role in Caeca declaring her candidacy. Your own protest on
> protest on protest just leads to that conclusion.
>
> 2. I am reminded of a speech given by Richard Nixon....the moment I read
> this, it was a famous speech...where he admitted wrong doing but pulled the
> heart strings at the same time. That speech is the Checkers Speech.
>
> part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4UEv_jjPL0
> part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhQD2UFCIbY
>
> You do Nixon proud Lentulus.
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
> cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
>>
>>
>> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for Praetor
>> then? <<<
>>
>> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a
>> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts in
>> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she can at
>> this time be more useful in serving our community.
>>
>> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat
>> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house when I
>> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then new
>> information to me, as well as to them.
>>
>> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if she
>> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but I, and
>> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage and
>> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in service to
>> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute the best.
>> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the other
>> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
>>
>> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my friend
>> Maria Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent magistrate
>> and a person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to do
>> sacrifice one year of her life in a position which she does not want, and as
>> it seems, I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
>>
>> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only thing I
>> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into the
>> confidence of the voters.
>>
>>
>>
>
>

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

Ave!

In regards to your post, can you think of some examples that would give you
cause for concern?

Respectfully,

Sulla

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <
gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
>
> C. Iulius Caesar L. Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.
>
> Whoever is successful in the election for praetor will have to, to a large
> extent, follow the lead and legislative program of the consuls for next
> year. Praetors do not have a free hand amice, as you know, at implementing a
> legislative program of their own.
>
> That said, what laws do I want to repeal you ask. Any law that is so badly
> written that it cannot be salvaged without a total rewrite, any law that is
> irrelevant to the current and foreseeable circumstances of the res publica,
> and any law that conflicts with the constitution to a degree that it could
> not be salvaged without a total rewrite.
>
> As to changing laws, the same criteria as above, especially in respect of
> laws where only a small percentage of the overall law is contradictory.
>
> A reasonable time frame is a subjective judgment, which is going to be
> affected by numerous factors, but if the work is started immediately in
> January there is no reason that I can see that would prevent the process
> being completed by December 31st.
>
> Now, I am sure for some the burning issue is the fate of the Lex Salicia
> poenalis and Lex Salicia iudiciaria. Put simply the system they outline has
> not worked, does not work and will not work, with the degree of universal
> support necessary for a legal code. The reason being, that on all sides of
> the spectrum there is recognition that the practical application of trials
> do not match the expectations of justice and the goals of the drafters.
>
> However, having reviewed some suggestions for replacing them, I note that
> some suggest total abolishment and for others the solution is a simplified
> trial process. The issue goes deeper than that. I believe it is completely
> impossible to find citizens that will be widely accepted as neutral in their
> assessment of the evidence. It doesn't matter if they can be neutral; it is
> the perception that counts, which influences the level of support for the
> system.
>
> Additionally there are sections of the current leges which it would be
> absolutely vital to retain if a simplified trail process was adopted, namely
> temporal limits of Nova Roman authority. That is just one example. Simple
> and short when constructing a legal code is not necessarily best. leaving
> the process to be decided by the sitting praetor will without question be a
> source of dispute, as it was before. The real question is do we need an
> internal justice system? Add to that, should we even attempt to construct
> one with such a small population base, where charges of bias will run
> rampant against those comprising the court?
>
> The easy thing to do in response to your question is to produce a shopping
> list of laws to replace, repeal, but the issues run far deeper than knocking
> a few unpopular ones off the books, only to discover that the price of
> popularity is an even bigger mess. Any changes to our legal code have to
> command near universal support, they need to be well mooted and discussed at
> all levels, ideally they should be modeled "in action" to see how they
> perform. It maybe the popular thing to do to stake the legal code, but I as
> praetor would be obligated to ensure that I didn't promote a popular cause
> and create a legacy of a huge mess for someone else to have to deal with
> next year, or in the years to come.
>
> So amice, I won't give you your shopping list of laws for the axe, but I
> will state that if I am elected I will assist immediately in any law reform
> they undertake, and to give politically neutral and constructive critical
> comments, and generally assist the process - which must be community based
> as it is the people's legal system - of review.
>
> Optime valete
>
> --- On Fri, 11/26/10, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...<robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...<robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>
> >
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] To all Candidates for Praetor and consul
> To: "Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>" <
> nova-roma@yahoogroups.com <nova-roma%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Date: Friday, November 26, 2010, 12:23 PM
>
>
> Ave!
>
> Which laws would you repeal? Which laws would you change and why? What
> would be a reasonable time frame for repealing those laws you suggested?
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
> [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]

Gaius Tullius Valerianus Germanicus Lucio Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.

Ave Sulla! There is nothing inherently wrong in Nova Roma with a Vestal
holding political office. Such a thing is not against our own *mos maiorum,
*though it certainly would be for Roma Antiqua! What I objected to with
former citizen Messalina - what I think we can all agree was objectionable -
is a Vestal holding office and claiming to be sacrosanct, in essence
"hiding behind" the sacred office in order to dodge the mudslinging
associated with political office.

Nova Roma needs good Vestals. It also needs good political officers. I would
be happy to countenance the same woman serving Roma in both ways, as long as
she doesn't think her service to Vesta shields her from the consequences of
her own political acts.

Vale!

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Robert Woolwine
<robert.woolwine@...>wrote:

> Ave,
>
> I did forget to add one other thing. We had one vestal run for office and
> we
> know exactly how that turned out. Do we really need to do down this road
> again?
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Robert Woolwine <
> robert.woolwine@...
> > wrote:
>
> > Ave!
> >
> > I have two things to say:
> >
> > 1 - One doth protest too much. I think based on your response we all
> know
> > you had a role in Caeca declaring her candidacy. Your own protest on
> > protest on protest just leads to that conclusion.
> >
> > 2. I am reminded of a speech given by Richard Nixon....the moment I read
> > this, it was a famous speech...where he admitted wrong doing but pulled
> the
> > heart strings at the same time. That speech is the Checkers Speech.
> >
> > part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4UEv_jjPL0
> > part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhQD2UFCIbY
> >
> > You do Nixon proud Lentulus.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
> > cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
> >>
> >>
> >> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for Praetor
> >> then? <<<
> >>
> >> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a
> >> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts in
> >> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she can
> at
> >> this time be more useful in serving our community.
> >>
> >> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat
> >> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house when I
> >> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then new
> >> information to me, as well as to them.
> >>
> >> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if she
> >> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but I,
> and
> >> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage and
> >> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in
> service to
> >> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute the
> best.
> >> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the other
> >> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
> >>
> >> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my friend
> >> Maria Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent
> magistrate
> >> and a person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to do
> >> sacrifice one year of her life in a position which she does not want,
> and as
> >> it seems, I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
> >>
> >> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only thing
> I
> >> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into the
> >> confidence of the voters.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

Avete Omnes,

I have been reviewing some of the items on the CP agenda and first I would
like to thank Pontiff Sabinus for letting anyone observe the CP postings.
The openness is refreshing and much needed! I do have some questions with
regards to the current agenda.

1 - did the individuals listed in the agenda for Pontif and Augur submit
applications for those positions? Have all of the possible new appointees
express a desire for the positions stated in the agenda? Have any of them
gone through the Camillus program? Have any of them received any training
while in the Camillus program?

2 - Regarding the Rex Sacrorum position, I do have a number of questions.
In Nova Roma is there a job description for the position already in place?
I understand that the position is a joint position. Is she a citizen? A
Patrician? Is she a Cultus - and how do we know? How does this get
reconciled with the applicant's previous marriages?

3 - Given the recent posting of the division between the Religio Piscina vs
the Religio Romana, is there going to be a definitive statement regarding
subversive attempt by Piscinus to divide the Religio? ie. Is there going
to be an agenda item expelling Pisicnus from the CP?

4 - With regard to Item 4 - Waiving the requirements, why is this necessary
and why is it being sought?

Respectfully,

Sulla


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

Ave,

In a perfect world you would be correct! However, we do not live in perfect
worlds, we have to go based on the facts and on lessons from history. We
have a perfect example from history, from this very year. Nova Roma should
learn from history and not follow the path of insanity by repeating the same
mistake over and over and expecting a different result.

Respectfully,

Sulla

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Gaius Tullius Valerianus <
gaius.tullius.valerianus@...> wrote:

>
>
> Gaius Tullius Valerianus Germanicus Lucio Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.
>
> Ave Sulla! There is nothing inherently wrong in Nova Roma with a Vestal
> holding political office. Such a thing is not against our own *mos maiorum,
> *though it certainly would be for Roma Antiqua! What I objected to with
> former citizen Messalina - what I think we can all agree was objectionable
> -
> is a Vestal holding office and claiming to be sacrosanct, in essence
> "hiding behind" the sacred office in order to dodge the mudslinging
> associated with political office.
>
> Nova Roma needs good Vestals. It also needs good political officers. I
> would
> be happy to countenance the same woman serving Roma in both ways, as long
> as
> she doesn't think her service to Vesta shields her from the consequences of
> her own political acts.
>
> Vale!
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Robert Woolwine
>
> <robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>>wrote:
>
> > Ave,
> >
> > I did forget to add one other thing. We had one vestal run for office and
> > we
> > know exactly how that turned out. Do we really need to do down this road
> > again?
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Robert Woolwine <
> > robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Ave!
> > >
> > > I have two things to say:
> > >
> > > 1 - One doth protest too much. I think based on your response we all
> > know
> > > you had a role in Caeca declaring her candidacy. Your own protest on
> > > protest on protest just leads to that conclusion.
> > >
> > > 2. I am reminded of a speech given by Richard Nixon....the moment I
> read
> > > this, it was a famous speech...where he admitted wrong doing but pulled
> > the
> > > heart strings at the same time. That speech is the Checkers Speech.
> > >
> > > part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4UEv_jjPL0
> > > part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhQD2UFCIbY
> > >
> > > You do Nixon proud Lentulus.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
> > > cn_corn_lent@... <cn_corn_lent%40yahoo.it>> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for
> Praetor
> > >> then? <<<
> > >>
> > >> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a
> > >> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts
> in
> > >> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she can
> > at
> > >> this time be more useful in serving our community.
> > >>
> > >> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat
> > >> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house when
> I
> > >> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then
> new
> > >> information to me, as well as to them.
> > >>
> > >> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if
> she
> > >> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but I,
> > and
> > >> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage
> and
> > >> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in
> > service to
> > >> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute the
> > best.
> > >> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the
> other
> > >> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
> > >>
> > >> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my friend
> > >> Maria Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent
> > magistrate
> > >> and a person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to do
> > >> sacrifice one year of her life in a position which she does not want,
> > and as
> > >> it seems, I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
> > >>
> > >> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only
> thing
> > I
> > >> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into
> the
> > >> confidence of the voters.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [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]

Caeca Valeriano sal,

Extremely well said, and I concur, entirely.

C.

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

Ave Sulla,

I guess my point is that if we had a Vestal running for office, I would hope
that the voters would inquire into whether or not said Vestal intended to
stand on her sacred office as a "shield" for her political one - and vote
accordingly.

My point is that we would need to either (a) pass a law saying Vestals may
not run or (b) pass a law saying that Vestals holding political office gain
no special "immunity" to mudslinging. Or otherwise establish which it's
going to be (maybe such should not require a law, really, but you see my
point). Does NR even have a Vestal at this point? I thought we had a couple
of women who considered themselves to be "in training," or "sacerdotes
Vestae" without being Virgines Vestales . . . is this an immediate concern?

Vale,
~ Valerianus

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Robert Woolwine
<robert.woolwine@...>wrote:

> Ave,
>
> In a perfect world you would be correct! However, we do not live in
> perfect
> worlds, we have to go based on the facts and on lessons from history. We
> have a perfect example from history, from this very year. Nova Roma should
> learn from history and not follow the path of insanity by repeating the
> same
> mistake over and over and expecting a different result.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Gaius Tullius Valerianus <
> gaius.tullius.valerianus@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Gaius Tullius Valerianus Germanicus Lucio Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.
> >
> > Ave Sulla! There is nothing inherently wrong in Nova Roma with a Vestal
> > holding political office. Such a thing is not against our own *mos
> maiorum,
> > *though it certainly would be for Roma Antiqua! What I objected to with
> > former citizen Messalina - what I think we can all agree was
> objectionable
> > -
> > is a Vestal holding office and claiming to be sacrosanct, in essence
> > "hiding behind" the sacred office in order to dodge the mudslinging
> > associated with political office.
> >
> > Nova Roma needs good Vestals. It also needs good political officers. I
> > would
> > be happy to countenance the same woman serving Roma in both ways, as long
> > as
> > she doesn't think her service to Vesta shields her from the consequences
> of
> > her own political acts.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Robert Woolwine
> >
> > <robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>>wrote:
> >
> > > Ave,
> > >
> > > I did forget to add one other thing. We had one vestal run for office
> and
> > > we
> > > know exactly how that turned out. Do we really need to do down this
> road
> > > again?
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Robert Woolwine <
> > > robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ave!
> > > >
> > > > I have two things to say:
> > > >
> > > > 1 - One doth protest too much. I think based on your response we all
> > > know
> > > > you had a role in Caeca declaring her candidacy. Your own protest on
> > > > protest on protest just leads to that conclusion.
> > > >
> > > > 2. I am reminded of a speech given by Richard Nixon....the moment I
> > read
> > > > this, it was a famous speech...where he admitted wrong doing but
> pulled
> > > the
> > > > heart strings at the same time. That speech is the Checkers Speech.
> > > >
> > > > part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4UEv_jjPL0
> > > > part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhQD2UFCIbY
> > > >
> > > > You do Nixon proud Lentulus.
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Sulla
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
> > > > cn_corn_lent@... <cn_corn_lent%40yahoo.it>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for
> > Praetor
> > > >> then? <<<
> > > >>
> > > >> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such a
> > > >> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political conflicts
> > in
> > > >> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she
> can
> > > at
> > > >> this time be more useful in serving our community.
> > > >>
> > > >> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private chat
> > > >> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house
> when
> > I
> > > >> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was then
> > new
> > > >> information to me, as well as to them.
> > > >>
> > > >> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed if
> > she
> > > >> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" - but
> I,
> > > and
> > > >> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her courage
> > and
> > > >> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in
> > > service to
> > > >> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute
> the
> > > best.
> > > >> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the
> > other
> > > >> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
> > > >>
> > > >> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my
> friend
> > > >> Maria Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent
> > > magistrate
> > > >> and a person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to
> do
> > > >> sacrifice one year of her life in a position which she does not
> want,
> > > and as
> > > >> it seems, I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
> > > >>
> > > >> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only
> > thing
> > > I
> > > >> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her into
> > the
> > > >> confidence of the voters.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [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]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

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

Ave!

I understand. I just think the entire concept of anyone doing anything
related to a title to service of Vesta and running for office, at the same
time, now brings an additional layer of pause given the actions of Messalina
during the coup. And, as you pointed out, Messalina using the cloak of
invincibility to mudslinging also is something that needs to be taken into
consideration for any future candidate that wants both pointy hats. We
crossed that Rubicon already. Therefore, it is now a question of
credibility and then we have religious implications created by the previous
occupant. I agree with you, that we should have a law stating one or the
other. But, its a shame that it seems every issue is going to require some
law instead of relying on the good judgment of the candidate to prevent this
issues from needing to be addressed in the first place.

Vale,

Sulla

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Gaius Tullius Valerianus <
gaius.tullius.valerianus@...> wrote:

>
>
> Ave Sulla,
>
> I guess my point is that if we had a Vestal running for office, I would
> hope
> that the voters would inquire into whether or not said Vestal intended to
> stand on her sacred office as a "shield" for her political one - and vote
> accordingly.
>
> My point is that we would need to either (a) pass a law saying Vestals may
> not run or (b) pass a law saying that Vestals holding political office gain
> no special "immunity" to mudslinging. Or otherwise establish which it's
> going to be (maybe such should not require a law, really, but you see my
> point). Does NR even have a Vestal at this point? I thought we had a couple
> of women who considered themselves to be "in training," or "sacerdotes
> Vestae" without being Virgines Vestales . . . is this an immediate concern?
>
> Vale,
> ~ Valerianus
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Robert Woolwine
>
> <robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com>>wrote:
>
> > Ave,
> >
> > In a perfect world you would be correct! However, we do not live in
> > perfect
> > worlds, we have to go based on the facts and on lessons from history. We
> > have a perfect example from history, from this very year. Nova Roma
> should
> > learn from history and not follow the path of insanity by repeating the
> > same
> > mistake over and over and expecting a different result.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Gaius Tullius Valerianus <
> > gaius.tullius.valerianus@...<gaius.tullius.valerianus%40gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gaius Tullius Valerianus Germanicus Lucio Cornelio Sullae Felici S.P.D.
> > >
> > > Ave Sulla! There is nothing inherently wrong in Nova Roma with a Vestal
> > > holding political office. Such a thing is not against our own *mos
> > maiorum,
> > > *though it certainly would be for Roma Antiqua! What I objected to with
> > > former citizen Messalina - what I think we can all agree was
> > objectionable
> > > -
> > > is a Vestal holding office and claiming to be sacrosanct, in essence
> > > "hiding behind" the sacred office in order to dodge the mudslinging
> > > associated with political office.
> > >
> > > Nova Roma needs good Vestals. It also needs good political officers. I
> > > would
> > > be happy to countenance the same woman serving Roma in both ways, as
> long
> > > as
> > > she doesn't think her service to Vesta shields her from the
> consequences
> > of
> > > her own political acts.
> > >
> > > Vale!
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Robert Woolwine
> > >
> > > <robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com><robert.woolwine%
> 40gmail.com>>wrote:
>
> > >
> > > > Ave,
> > > >
> > > > I did forget to add one other thing. We had one vestal run for office
> > and
> > > > we
> > > > know exactly how that turned out. Do we really need to do down this
> > road
> > > > again?
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Sulla
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Robert Woolwine <
> > > > robert.woolwine@... <robert.woolwine%40gmail.com><robert.woolwine%
> 40gmail.com>
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Ave!
> > > > >
> > > > > I have two things to say:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 - One doth protest too much. I think based on your response we
> all
> > > > know
> > > > > you had a role in Caeca declaring her candidacy. Your own protest
> on
> > > > > protest on protest just leads to that conclusion.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. I am reminded of a speech given by Richard Nixon....the moment I
> > > read
> > > > > this, it was a famous speech...where he admitted wrong doing but
> > pulled
> > > > the
> > > > > heart strings at the same time. That speech is the Checkers Speech.
> > > > >
> > > > > part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4UEv_jjPL0
> > > > > part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhQD2UFCIbY
> > > > >
> > > > > You do Nixon proud Lentulus.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sulla
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
> > > > > cn_corn_lent@... <cn_corn_lent%40yahoo.it> <cn_corn_lent%
> 40yahoo.it>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Lentulus Sullae quaestori candidato sal.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> So, what exactly did Lentulus say to convince you to run for
> > > Praetor
> > > > >> then? <<<
> > > > >>
> > > > >> LOL - Actually I tried to *deter* Maria Caeca from running to such
> a
> > > > >> dangerous position where she might be exposed to political
> conflicts
> > > in
> > > > >> their ugliest form, but she felt that this is the office where she
> > can
> > > > at
> > > > >> this time be more useful in serving our community.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So that's a false presumption which you have based on a private
> chat
> > > > >> discussion that I had with two individuals who were at your house
> > when
> > > I
> > > > >> discussed Maria Caeca's possible candidacy with them, which was
> then
> > > new
> > > > >> information to me, as well as to them.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I worry for Caeca, who is my friend, and I would be more relaxed
> if
> > > she
> > > > >> would not get into the middle of what is called "NR politics" -
> but
> > I,
> > > > and
> > > > >> everyone else who likes her, must acknowledge and praise her
> courage
> > > and
> > > > >> dedication, that she wants to give her skills, energy and time in
> > > > service to
> > > > >> our community in a position where she thoughts she can contribute
> > the
> > > > best.
> > > > >> That is honorable from her, and the same is very honorable for the
> > > other
> > > > >> candidates, too, who put their name into the box so far.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Lest assured, L. Sulla, that while I will certainly support my
> > friend
> > > > >> Maria Caeca in these elections, as I came to know her as diligent
> > > > magistrate
> > > > >> and a person of high qualities, I could never ever convince her to
> > do
> > > > >> sacrifice one year of her life in a position which she does not
> > want,
> > > > and as
> > > > >> it seems, I even failed in my efforts to deter her.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> But once she is a candidate now, and I couldn't stop her, the only
> > > thing
> > > > I
> > > > >> can do for her is to help wherever I can, and to recommend her
> into
> > > the
> > > > >> confidence of the voters.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [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]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

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

Lentulus Sullae sal.

LOL @ the Nixon joke :)

BTW, on a more serious point of this question: If you read more Roman oratores, you will find that this is the kind of prose you can expect from a fanatical Latinist who intentionally imitates Roman oratory. ;)

Roman Salute

Ave,

A lie, is a lie, is a lie. Nevertheless. Coat it what you will. It does
not change the color.

Vale,

Sulla

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:

>
>
> Lentulus Sullae sal.
>
> LOL @ the Nixon joke :)
>
> BTW, on a more serious point of this question: If you read more Roman
> oratores, you will find that this is the kind of prose you can expect from a
> fanatical Latinist who intentionally imitates Roman oratory. ;)
>
> Roman Salute
>
>
>

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

Lentulus,

The Nixon thing was not a joke. It is a valid comparison of people who have
ethical issues. You and Nixon both do. I know about he conversation that
you had. You did not give an impression of trying to dissuade, so you
lied. That makes you...well - we all know the word. Now, you could save
face by coming clean as to your role. Or not. The thing is. I have been
accused of many things in NR, and a liar is not one of them. That cannot be
said about you.

Vale,

Sulla

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Cn. Cornelius Lentulus <
cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:

>
>
> Lentulus Sullae sal.
>
> LOL @ the Nixon joke :)
>
> BTW, on a more serious point of this question: If you read more Roman
> oratores, you will find that this is the kind of prose you can expect from a
> fanatical Latinist who intentionally imitates Roman oratory. ;)
>
> Roman Salute
>
>
>

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

Lentulus Sullae sal.

You were accused of lying by many, don't pretend you weren't.

I state it again, what I say is true, but I don't expect you to beleive to me: I'm not the Bible.

All that said, have a nice day; and I don't answer to this tread again because I said all what I had to, and someone has to work, work is worth more than talk! :)

Salvete Omnes Cives Nova Romanii;

This day I come before you as an official candidate for the Office of
Consul of Nova Roma.

The Presiding Magistrate, Consul Publius Memmius Albucius, has
officially listed me as such. I should like to thank him for his
consideration, and ask that the Cives Nova Roma give me their votes.

I should like to repeat the points I laid out in my unofficial
statement of yesterday, and amplify a bit. I offer, I think, a choice
for the vision and dream, which could be Nova Roma, achieved through
thoughtful consideration, planning and execution of needed changes.

I am not, as I previously stated, either the most educated or forceful
of men. Neither am I straitjacketed by a moral code that I will
impose on anyone save to maintain the necessary good order within the
society we seek to build. However, I have my own mind, viewpoints and
methods of reaching out. I prefer consensus; many times a solution
that satisfies neither side fully is the best one for the whole.

My worldview is shaped by what I have learned from family, friends,
teachers, mentors, co-workers and the wider world around me. It is
shaped by the moral and ethical teachings of the religions and
philosophies, which I have studied over the years. It is shaped by
seeing my father sit as a "Senator" for 16 years in our local
assembly. It is shaped by watching the elders of my family live their
lives and make the world a better place for them having been in it.
It is shaped by the years I undertook military service, youth
leadership, working as an officer at various levels in a major
re-enactment society. To the latter point, at one time I led a
chapter that had almost 300 members. During those years we grew
enough to spin off two subchapters.

I care deeply that Nova Roma not just survive, but that it grow and
thrive to properly Honor my beloved ancestors who are (I think and
believe) of Roman nature. That Honor is part of my worldview, too.
It is likewise part of my private devotions, which are of the North.
That Honor leads me to pledge my Respect for the Roman Religio.

I am at once a practical man and a romantic, though the latter is a
stronger quality.

Rome for me is much more than a collection of buildings along the
Tiber river, more than its military victories, its engineering
marvels, Language, Culture, Spirituality, Law, Worldview or
Artistry...She is a living thing, made up of living beings who share a
common goal of bringing to this modern world of ours that which is
good within Romanitas, its Virtues, Civic and Private.

I admit to being more visionary than earthbound. But, perhaps, this
is what Nova Roma needs; one consul Earthbound, the other
Not-so-much...two halves of a whole.

My civic record is listed in the Album Civum.
http://www.novaroma.org/civitas/album?id=252

I have performed both well and badly. I have, however, never sought
to leave Nova Roma whatever the ills in my life outside her borders.
I have left office, but the health problems, which were the impetus
are well under control.

You have questions, I am sure. I will answer. If nothing else, I am
open about my life.

I hope that I have earned your trust over the years and pledge to
continue earning it.

--
In amicitia et fide
P Ullerius Stephanus Venator
Civis et Poeta

Lentulus,

The difference is one of us is a liar and the other one is extremely blunt to the point of extreme. I know which one I am.

Vale,

Sulla

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 27, 2010, at 5:12 PM, "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <cn_corn_lent@...> wrote:

> Lentulus Sullae sal.
>
> You were accused of lying by many, don't pretend you weren't.
>
> I state it again, what I say is true, but I don't expect you to beleive to me: I'm not the Bible.
>
> All that said, have a nice day; and I don't answer to this tread again because I said all what I had to, and someone has to work, work is worth more than talk! :)
>
>


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

Salvete,


Hey guys, not to be killjoy party crasher but could this go back to a more
constructive point? The issue has been stabbed severely and now its just
ping-pong of just yes and no quips..


I'm not being Den Mommy and sending you to corners, I'm just asking maybe
something more tangible and constructive.

Excuse the Nanny moment :)

Valete,
Aeternia

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Robert <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:

>
>
> Lentulus,
>
> The difference is one of us is a liar and the other one is extremely blunt
> to the point of extreme. I know which one I am.
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2010, at 5:12 PM, "Cn. Cornelius Lentulus" <
> cn_corn_lent@... <cn_corn_lent%40yahoo.it>> wrote:
>
> > Lentulus Sullae sal.
> >
> > You were accused of lying by many, don't pretend you weren't.
> >
> > I state it again, what I say is true, but I don't expect you to beleive
> to me: I'm not the Bible.
> >
> > All that said, have a nice day; and I don't answer to this tread again
> because I said all what I had to, and someone has to work, work is worth
> more than talk! :)
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


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

Heya

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Belle Morte Statia wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> Hey guys, not to be killjoy party crasher but could this go back to a more
> constructive point?   The issue has been stabbed severely and now its just
> ping-pong of just yes and no quips..
>
>
> I'm not being Den Mommy and sending you to corners, I'm just asking maybe
> something more tangible and constructive.
>
> Excuse the Nanny moment :)
>
> Valete,
> Aeternia
>

I'll ditto here; we need much less back and forth and much more together.

Venii (ex-Den Chief ;-)

Sta. Cornelia Aeternia Omnibus in foro S.P.D.


I was one of the few individuals who were waiting for the right time to make
this announcement, I suppose no better time than now.


My declaration for the intent to run for the position of Curule Aedile was
accepted by our Maior Consul, I fulfill the requirements of being well over
the age of 25, an Assidui, current low ranking Magistrate, and a current
second rank Provincial Officer. This is my formal announcement of my
intention to run for next years office of Curule Aedile.

As some of you know and many do not, I have been involved in Nova Roma
since Dec.'99, I have made many friends over the long span of time, some
have become what I basically consider family. As the founder of the
Sodalitas Musarum, I brought forth the first Culturally Artistic Sodalitas
to NR. Over the years my vision for artistic growth has developed and
indeed has matured. I believe that with my vision, along with hardwork,
and iron clad determination, I'll give a definite breath of fresh air to
the Aedileship.

My background in the management of others in group settings, falls primarily
with my extensive impeccable background(I'd rather not list everything for
it will be a while) and involvement in many Re-enacting circles ranging from
the Dark Age/Medieval to Late Roman Empire, I have been involved with this
scene since childhood, and I have established my own group which currently
has over 70 members and the end of the day, they technically still answer to
me. I know many may frown upon the words above, but I believe this gives
me an edge and different perspective that can be applied to the Aedileship
and make it something worthwhile.

My work ethic has always been " Gotta Work Hard, to Play Hard" and that will
be applied to the office of Curule Aedile, I do also have my proposed
agenda for the upcoming year, but didn't want to bungle the list too much.
But it will be posted in the next few days, if anyone wants to do Q&A
sessions I'll gladly do them.

Thank you all for listening and your attention.

A Bona Fortuna across the board to all the Candidates!

Vale Optime,
Statia Cornelia Valeri. Juliana Aeternia


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

Salve amica.

Naturally you have my vote. Well done!

Vale bene
Caesar

--- On Sat, 11/27/10, Belle Morte Statia <syrenslullaby@...> wrote:

> From: Belle Morte Statia <syrenslullaby@...>
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Candidacy for Curule Aedile
> To: "nova-roma" <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>, "publiusalbucius" <albucius_aoe@...>
> Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 7:33 PM
> Sta. Cornelia  Aeternia Omnibus
> in foro S.P.D.
>
>
> I was one of the few individuals who were waiting for the

Brava Aeternia;

I know your worth, and value.

My support is yours.

Vale - Venator

Salvete Omnes;

As Consul P Memmius Albucius has also declared G Equitius Cato an
acceptable candidate for the office of Consul, I should like to
formally write that he has my support and trust.

I believe that he is knowledgeable, experienced and even-tempered; a
good combination in this very important year for our mutual
undertaking. He has the passion and thoughtfulness I believe we
need.

Valete - P Ullerius Stephanus Venator

Aeternia Caesari sal:


Thank you Senator, your vote of confidence means a great deal to me.


Vale,
Aeternia

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Gnaeus Iulius Caesar <
gn_iulius_caesar@...> wrote:

>
>
> Salve amica.
>
> Naturally you have my vote. Well done!
>
> Vale bene
> Caesar
>
> --- On Sat, 11/27/10, Belle Morte Statia <syrenslullaby@...<syrenslullaby%40gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> > From: Belle Morte Statia <syrenslullaby@...<syrenslullaby%40gmail.com>
> >
> > Subject: [Nova-Roma] Candidacy for Curule Aedile
> > To: "nova-roma" <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>>,
> "publiusalbucius" <albucius_aoe@... <albucius_aoe%40hotmail.com>>
> > Date: Saturday, November 27, 2010, 7:33 PM
>
> > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia Omnibus
> > in foro S.P.D.
> >
> >
> > I was one of the few individuals who were waiting for the
>
>
>

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

Aeternia Venatori sal:

As always your words always humble me fellow Poeta, I thank you truly for
the support.

Venii you're so the rockstar :-)

Vale,
Aeternia

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator <
famila.ulleria.venii@...> wrote:

>
>
> Brava Aeternia;
>
> I know your worth, and value.
>
> My support is yours.
>
> Vale - Venator
>
>

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

This was supposed to go to the ML. :)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...>
Date: Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:03 PM
Subject: To the Praetor Candidates - Cato vs Piscinus trial
To: BackAlley <backalley@yahoogroups.com>


Ave!

I think its a safe opinion that the trial between Cato and Piscinus will
carry over to next year. So, my question is how will the candidates for
Praetor handle a trial being handed to them that is not entirely completed?

Respectfully,

Sulla


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

Salve,

Pick up where things leave off and continue.

Vale,

Gualterus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:
>
> This was supposed to go to the ML. :)
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...>
> Date: Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:03 PM
> Subject: To the Praetor Candidates - Cato vs Piscinus trial
> To: BackAlley <backalley@yahoogroups.com>
>
>
> Ave!
>
> I think its a safe opinion that the trial between Cato and Piscinus will
> carry over to next year. So, my question is how will the candidates for
> Praetor handle a trial being handed to them that is not entirely completed?
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Cato omnibus in foro SPD

Hodiernus dies est ante diem IV Kalendas Decembris; haec dies comitialis est.

"Some authorities state that this war was managed by the consuls and
it was they who celebrated the triumph over the Samnites, and further
that Fabius invaded Apulia and brought away great quantities of spoil.
There is no discrepancy as to A. Cornelius having been Dictator that
year, the only doubt is whether he was appointed to conduct the war,
or whether, owing to the serious illness of L. Plautius, the praetor,
he was appointed to give the signal for starting the chariot races,
and after discharging this not very noteworthy function resigned
office. It is difficult to decide which account or which authority to
prefer. I believe that the true history has been falsified by funeral
orations and lying inscriptions on the family busts, since each family
appropriates to itself an imaginary record of noble deeds and official
distinctions. It is at all events owing to this cause that so much
confusion has been introduced into the records of private careers and
public events. There is no writer of those times now extant who was
contemporary with the events he relates and whose authority,
therefore, can be depended upon." - Livy, History of Rome 8.40



"I am the goddess Sekhmet, and I take my seat upon the place by the
side of Amt-ur the great wind of heaven." - Book of the Dead, "The
Chapter of The Mouth"

"May the goddess Sekhmet raise me, and lift me up. Let me ascend into
heaven, let that which I command be performed in Het-ka-Ptah. I know
how to use my heart. I am master of my heart-case. I am master of my
hands and arms. I am master of my legs. I have the power to do that
which my KA desireth to do. My Heart-soul shall not be kept a prisoner
in my body at the gates of Amentet when I would go in in peace and
come forth in peace." - Book of the Dead, "The Chapter of Giving a
Heart to Osiris"

In ancient Egypt, today was held in honor of the goddess Sekhmet. The
ancient Egyptian goddess Sekhmet is known as the Eye of Ra. She is the
power that protects the good and annihilates the wicked. Sekhmet is
the wrathful form of Hathor (goddess of joy, music, dance, sexual
love, pregnancy and birth). With leonine head, female human body and
the strength of her father, she is the noontime sun - intense
blinding heat.

To the Old Kingdom Egyptians, Nu was the divine father of the
primordal waters from whence Ra, the sun, came forth. Ra gave birth to
Shu, god of the wind, and Tefnut who was called "the spitter" because
she sent the rain. Together Shu and Tefnut were the Twins of our
heavenly constellations. Tefnut and Sekhmet both have human female
form with a head of the lion and both are recorded as daughters of Ra
by the Egyptians. Sekhmet is perhaps a later manifestation of Tefnut,
but in any event they are one and the same.

Sekhmet, goddess Hathor, is the daughter he plucked from his head and
sent out into the universe to avenge his anger. Nu spoke, "Let thine
Eye go forth against those who are rebels in the kingdom." Then the
gods spoke together, "Let thine eye go forth against these rebels.
When It cometh down from heaven, no human eye can be raised against
it." Sekhmet/Hathor, in the form of a lioness, hurled herself upon
the men who had rebelled against Ra. She attacked them with such fury
that the sun god feared she might exterminate the entire human race
and begged her to stop the carnage. She had no ears to hear it. So Ra
spilled 7,000 jugs containing a magic potion composed of beer and
pomegranate juice in her path. Sekhmet, mistook the red liquid for
human blood, lapped it up and become too drunk to continue the slaughter.

On the feast day of Sekhmet as many jugs of reddened beer were offered
as there were priestesses of the sun.

Valete bene!

Cato

Cato omnibus in foro SPD

I thank Ullerius Venator for his support, and likewise find in him a superb candidate for the consulship. He has the quiet fortitude and steadfast strength of character to help our Respublica stand on her feet again. I urge citizens to vote for him.

Valete,

Cato

SALVETE!

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:

> I have been reviewing some of the items on the CP agenda and first I would like to thank Pontiff Sabinus for letting anyone observe the CP postings. The openness is refreshing and much needed! I do have some questions with regards to the current agenda.>>>

Thank you for interest. These questions belong more to the contio - in order to not disturb the vote period - but I accept that we need more work in the mutual respect direction.
I will answer to them pointing out that the answers represent my personal opinions or, at last, the ones of a pontifex.

> 1 - did the individuals listed in the agenda for Pontif and Augur submit applications for those positions?

They submitted applications in the past and the CP know about their activity. That is in line wit:
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Pontifex_experience_and_service_decretum_%28Nova_Roma%29

>Have all of the possible new appointees express a desire for the positions stated in the agenda?>>>

Of course.

>Have any of them gone through the Camillus program? Have any of them received any training while in the Camillus program?>>>

Camillus program is a step for the new entries in the religion positions. Those proposed are not new appointments. They served before; some of them were approved in the camillus program and followed it. In the case of Valerianus Germanicus the current augures agreed during the contio that he is good addition. As time in the past he submitted an application for priesthood I don't see any problem with that.

> 2 - Regarding the Rex Sacrorum position, I do have a number of questions.
> In Nova Roma is there a job description for the position already in place?>>>

Yes, they were discussed in the past and presented again in the current item. The starting point of the job description is:
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Responsum_Pontificum_de_Collegio_Pontificum_%28Nova_Roma%29

> I understand that the position is a joint position. Is she a citizen? A Patrician? Is she a Cultus - and how do we know? How does this get reconciled with the applicant's previous marriages?>>>

The Modianus's wife is not a citizen. It was better to be in order to respect the ancient rules. However these ancient rules are respected in NR in conformity with the interests of the moment. For example we had Flamines Maiores who served without a wife (flamenica) and nobody objected to that (Scaurus as Flamen Quirinalis, and Cincinnatus as Flamen Martialis). From my part I will not deny the Modianus' desire to serve more in the religious area and even if NR will loose a good politician will get a better religious official and that is a real profit for NR Roman religion, isn't it?

> 3 - Given the recent posting of the division between the Religio Piscina vs the Religio Romana, is there going to be a definitive statement regarding subversive attempt by Piscinus to divide the Religio? ie. Is there going to be an agenda item expelling Pisicnus from the CP?>>>

Religio Romana is the same as we know. Religio Piscina is an invented term to characterize the one's political opinions during a period of time in the NR life. I talk about M. Moravius opinions which by the way are not about the Roman religion as time in this field he done an outstanding job.
From my part there will be not a statement about that division. First, is the Senate job to handle that if consider is a threat to the state. Second, nobody can deny the M. Moravius right to think different. If the CP wants to judge that, anyone from the CP can start the discussion. I am not a fan replacing an Inquisition with another one.
Third, I am more leaned to gather and not to divide especially when the one about you talk excluded himself from the NR daily life whatever that is, political and religious.

> 4 - With regard to Item 4 - Waiving the requirements, why is this necessary and why is it being sought?>>>

It is first about the annual various priesthood reports. I think that the CP has nothing to add, in write, to what was happen and already is known. The things were moved on and the witch hunt is not something suitable for the current mentality the CP tries to improve.
It is, second, about the wrong way used until now to force the priesthood to participate performing their duties. Active participation is required but the CP must find better solutions to emulate the priesthood to that direction.

VALETE,
Sabinus

>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla