Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:28:07 EDT

Let's turn that around.

Here in the US, we have no homogenous culture. Culture varies from region to
region. We DO have a common Constitution, and similar state political
systems. But religious, ethnic, language and social customs vary greatly in
the various areas of this nation.

So is the New Yorker a part of the US? If so...is the Appalachian miner part
of it also?

And so in the Roman Empire, it was a similar situation. But it was Roman
alright. A Roman Emperor made Constantinople the new capital. Caracalla
extended the citizenship to all free people within the Empire. The Eastern
culture and philosophy had indisputed influence on Rome, with Romans trying to
preserve and imitate it, and absorb it into their own culture.

To then arbitrarily cut off that same East from the word "Roman" is sheer
silliness. The Byzantines were still more "Roman" than any Nova Roman.

Festus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:48:08 EDT

PS...as the Roman world expanded, the Romans certainly saw the East as part of
their world. Their mythical ancestor Anneas came from the Eastern
Medditeranean!
At least Virgil acknowledges their debt to the Eastern parts of the Empire.

So, did Christianity bring about the fall of Rome? Hell no....the rot was
setting in long before Constantine {one of my heros, for his trying to undo
Diocletians bungling and naive tetrarchy}. Indeed, one may ask if the failure
of the gods to save Rome before the rot had spread is a sign of impotence.

Festus


Subject:	Re: The Eagle
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:49:28 -0400

Dexippus@-------- wrote:
>
> From: Dexippus@--------
>
> Hey...I never received my July issue of the newsletter! Did they go out? Did
> anyone receive it?
>
> Also...what about August's edition? Is that going out soon?
>
Dex, did you take out a subscription? I didn't see you on the mailing
list? August is being mailed this weekend.

- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:54:57 -0400

Dexippus@-------- wrote:
>
> From: Dexippus@--------
>
> In a message dated 98-08-13 22:34:37 EDT, you write:
>
> << You had said that not one of the classical scholars is a Roman. But
> neither
> are Nova Romans "Roman", except in that they have joined Nova Roma. >>
>
> I do have Roman blood in my veins! MAKE ME EMPEROR! PLEASE! : )
>
>Yo, Vin-NIE. Ya got my vote, ya know what I mean? Make me an offer I can't
refuse.

- F. Claudia Giancana Capone


Subject:	Re: elvis in dreamland
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:58:15 -0400

Ricci wrote:
>
> From: R-------- razenna@--------
>
> D. Iunius Palladius wrote:> > manifestation. Any comments???
> >
> > Yes, after I mentioned tourism the other day I was thinking we don't want
> > it to turn into a Roman "theme park" like that which is being built in the
> > hills outside Rome. I don't want it to be living history but just living.
> > Still, I don't see such a place being self-supportive, tourim will have to
> > be a factor though not the only one supporting it.
> >
> > Palladius
>
> (May the Deities of my home and heart protect my neck as I stick it
> out!)
>
> So far as the "theme park" thought goes, I on't think anybody goes to
> Graceland (or whatever it's called) who is not a believer in Elvis
> Incarnate in all His forms.
>
> Ericius.
>
> p.s.
> to all you archeoland ancient student types: think what furture digges
> will make out of all those idols and icons of the Elvis? Especially the
> disertations on the foot high Elvis statue booze bottles. Eh?
> C.A.E.
>
Oddly enough, for more scholarly clarification on this topic, see this
month's EAGLE. Only $5 a year, such a bargain.
-- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 01:01:45 -0400

C--------us622@-------- wrote:
>
> From: C--------us622@--------
>
> In a message dated 98-08-14 18:10:39 EDT, Gaius Lupinius Festus writes:
>
> << Then how do you explain the fact that the Eastern Empire lived on for
> another
> thousand years?
>
> Basically, because the Eastern Empire was Byzantine rather than Roman. Rome
> was the Western Empire, not the East. The city of Rome fell very soon after
> the Vestals were expelled and the Altar of Victory was removed from the
> Senate. Thereafter it ceased to be any sort of center of civilization or
> power.
>
See what happens when you eliminate the Vestal Virgins?

-- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 01:07:53 -0400

Nathan Hicks wrote:
>

&g--------rom: Na-------- Hicks moman@-------- >

>
> I'm not a person to be politic with words, so I'll just say it:
> the thinning of true Roman blood and culture by foreign peoples
> and manners was the ruin of Rome. Juvenal foresaw this and we,
> in our retrospection, must see the same. When a nation depends
> upon the servitude of foreign races, it is ruinous more to the
> conquerors than to the conquered.

Gosh this idea is familiar...
Maybe we should start a breeding program? All you folks with pure Roman
--------d, reply ---------mail to J. Mengelus@--------

- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: elvis in dreamland
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 01:34:48 -0400

Ricci wrote:
>
> From: R-------- razenna@--------
>
> m--------oon@-------- wrote:> >
> > Oddly enough, for more scholarly clarification on this topic, see this
> > month's EAGLE. Only $5 a year, such a bargain.
> > -- F. Claudia
> >
>
> $5 a year! I thought Germanicus was hawking the Eagle for $3 a year.
>
> Ericius
>
He charged ME $5, and I'm the editor! Hmmmmm...
- Claudia


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:03:38 -0400 (EDT)

On S--------15 Aug 1998 AstUs---------------- wrote:

> From: AstUs----------------
>
> Let's turn that around.
>
> Here in the US, we have no homogenous culture. Culture varies from region to
> region. We DO have a common Constitution, and similar state political
> systems. But religious, ethnic, language and social customs vary greatly in
> the various areas of this nation.
>
> So is the New Yorker a part of the US? If so...is the Appalachian miner part
> of it also?

> And so in the Roman Empire, it was a similar situation. But it was Roman
> alright. A Roman Emperor made Constantinople the new capital. Caracalla
> extended the citizenship to all free people within the Empire. The Eastern
> culture and philosophy had indisputed influence on Rome, with Romans trying to
> preserve and imitate it, and absorb it into their own culture.

Yes, but when a people starts to think of themselves as something else,
they become that. Thank you for bringing up the U.S. to aid our point. In
this country now, more emphasis is starting to be put on ethnicity rather
than national unity. As a result, the group rather than the nation
becomes more important. In the Southwest, the Hispanic population is
starting to think of themslves more as Mexican rather than American
(forgive my generalities). Look at the recent incident in LA where the
American soccer team played the Mexican team and was booed on its home
territory while the Mexican team was cheered wildly. In some areas, the
Mexican flag is seen more often than the American. It is the goal of many
to make it part of Mexico again. If the Southwest someday opts to become
part of Mexico, will they still be American because at one time they were
ruled from Washington and some vestiges of American culture remain here
and there? I think not.

At what point would you consider that the Byzantines stopped being Roman?
How are you defining Roman?

> To then arbitrarily cut off that same East from the word "Roman" is sheer
> silliness. The Byzantines were still more "Roman" than any Nova Roman.

I don't know how arbitrary they were being, they just didn't think of
themslves as Roman. After Rome fell there was no need to even make the
pretence of being connected to a dead empire in the west.

Palladius

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

Non scholae sed vitae discimus.

Seneca

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

"Such things have often happened and still happen,
and how can these be signs of the end of the world?"

Julian, Emperor of Rome 361-363 A.D.
Extant 331-363 A.D.


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:16:57 -0400 (EDT)

On S--------15 Aug 1998 AstUs---------------- wrote:

> From: AstUs----------------

> So, did Christianity bring about the fall of Rome? Hell no....the rot was
> setting in long before Constantine {one of my heros, for his trying to undo
> Diocletians bungling and naive tetrarchy}. Indeed, one may ask if the failure
> of the gods to save Rome before the rot had spread is a sign of impotence.

Well, I suppose someone has to have the great opportunist as a hero. So,
do you think xtianity played any role in the fall of Rome, contributing to
the weakness of the populace or do you think it a non-factor affecting
events neither one way or another?

As for impotence you mean of the Gods or of men? Man can't be lead by the
hand all the time. Perhaps the Gods just said fine, you turn from us, we
turn from you. Certainly once that connection with the tradition was
broken, many of the Romans themselves felt unprotected and felt despair,
no longer really trying to save their civilization. Think of it as
psychological if not divine.

Palladius

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

Non scholae sed vitae discimus.

Seneca

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

"Such things have often happened and still happen,
and how can these be signs of the end of the world?"

Julian, Emperor of Rome 361-363 A.D.
Extant 331-363 A.D.


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Nathan Hicks" moman@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 03:38:34 -0400

Here's my thought about the Official Languages proposal:
a Latinless Rome might as well be Walhalla, Michigan, IMO.
By requiring a translation of Latin into English and none of
English into Latin, no greater station is given to Latin than
to any other of the secondary languages--which this motion
equally provides for as an accompaniment to the English
version. If we wish Latin to have true legitimacy in Nova
Roma, it must have the power to write law, not just to pro-
mulgate what has been set down in another language.

I'm sure Saevus' and Sergius' opinion is more favored than
mine. But I think that, although the lines of a Latin passage
stand as formidably as do a legion's, such an array is no less
inspiring to behold.

Nathan Hicks
Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Nathan Hicks" moman@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 06:55:00 -0400

-----Original Message-----
From: m--------oon@-------- m--------oon@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Saturday, August 15, 1998 1:10 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul

>From: m--------oon@--------
>
>Nathan Hicks wrote:
>>
>> I'm not a person to be politic with words, so I'll just say it:
>> the thinning of true Roman blood and culture by foreign peoples
>> and manners was the ruin of Rome. Juvenal foresaw this and we,
>> in our retrospection, must see the same. When a nation depends
>> upon the servitude of foreign races, it is ruinous more to the
>> conquerors than to the conquered.
>
>Gosh this idea is familiar...
>Maybe we should start a breeding program? All you folks with pure Roman
>--------d, reply ---------mail to J. Mengelus@--------

Take it as it please you, Claudia. This doesn't concern the
matter of Eugenics which you blush so coyly at--although
the ancient Romans might have better heeded this advice:
'Cave ne canes trans saepem saliant ad saliendum.'

And, yes, I'll offer that bit of Latin as a law.

Nathan Hicks
Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus


Subject:	Nova Roma - not Dreamland.
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 08:50:55 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-12 20:39:25 EDT, Gaius Lupinius Festus writes:

> How significant is our micronation, or any other micronation? Or, perhaps
a
better question would be, 'why should any macronation take a micronation,
such
as Nova Roma, seriously?'

As far as Micronations go, I would personally say that Nova Roma is VERY
significant. It's the first serious attempt in centuries to gather people of
Classical interest, and to try and restore some of the Classical Roman ideals
and virtues into living society. It's an important and worthy set of goals,
and Nova Roma has been an effective means of achieving them.

> The question is important, because it touches on the question of what
purpose states and governments serve. In a nutshell, the Aristotlean answer
is that the best state and the best government exist to do for it's citizens
that which they cannot do themselves.

That's indeed an important statement, and it's one of the reasons that Nova
Roma was founded.

> Nova Roma cannot do much for it's citizens. It does not defend them
against forigen or national threats. It does not provide a saftey net should
our personal economic situations fall into jeapordy. It does not provide
roads, make safe our water-ways, etc. I think that most of us at least, if
not all, would agree that we are Americans, British, etc, first and foremost,
and Romans second.

Nova Roma does not HAVE to protect it's citizens from national threats,
provide economic safety nets, or provide roads or waterways. All that has been
done by larger nations, and there's no reason to challenge any of that. Nova
Roma is a *cultural* nation... working to revive the most basic foundations of
civilization which have been lost by the Macronations in their scrabble to
maintain all of the above. Nova Roma has been created to be a positive
influence on the modern world... NOT to try and encourage people to not think
of themselves as Americans, British or whatever.

Nova Roma has indeed done for its citizens what they could not provide for
themselves. It has provided an international focus for those who believe that
the various aspects of Classical Roman civilization are important, and deserve
to be a living part of society. Before Nova Roma there WAS no Roman faction...
just a few quiet religious, reenactor or scholarly enthusiasts puttering
around by themselves, and wondering why no one else on earth shared their
passion for the Roman world.

The infrastructure Nova Roma has provided to date is one of information and
contact... we've worked hard to gather everything possible into one place, so
that all Citizens may partake and share. We haven't built roads - we've built
an internet list, etc. so that we may keep in contact. We haven't built
waterways - but we HAVE set up the ability for trade, etc.

It doesn't hurt to appreciate the efforts that have gone into this, and enjoy
what we've all been able to accomplish so far.

> So let us imagine for a momement that within a few years the Nova Roma
citizenry grew to an extent suffienct to afford the purchase of a small
island. What would be the purpose, other than having a place to erect a few
pillared marble temples? How many people in Nova Roma would actually desire
to move and live on the "New Rome" island? Would anyone here really wish to
leave behind the benefits of our American or other original citizenship? And
what if a few people did in fact go to live on the island? What would they
do, after the temples would be built? Pray in them? Perhaps grow some
crops?
Would the effort be worth the majority of non-resident Nova Romans to support
these people?

I'm afraid that this is a somewhat confused idea of the goals of Nova Roma.
We're not a "Homeland Society", looking to create a utopia. We're attempting
to rebuild a world culture, which will exist internationally - to improve
modern society itself. Our stated goal of 108 acres for a forum is certainly a
priority for the future, but it is in no way the "ultimate focus" of Nova
Roma. In fact, the Forum which has been proposed would not be a residence for
citizens... if ever achieved it would house temples, a Rostra, Curia shops,
etc. It would have to be located somewhere fairly accessible (within a
modernized nation where travel wouldn't be impossible) and would be available
to ALL citizens. HOWEVER... no one is focusing on such a capital at present.
We're concerned with Roman culture and society, and providing a working focus
for people who are interested in such things.

> The idea of a forum to serve as a "capital of Roman culture" is a pleasant
one. But really, how practical? Skeptic that I am, I am highly doubtful
Nova
Roma can be anything other than what it is at present; a voluntary society of
people who are interested in and like Ancient Rome, and who, such as myself,
have a sort of sad wish that the old Empire would still exist.

As far as I'm concerned, the idea of a "world capital" is fairly practical.
108 acres isn't all that much land, and we're not talking about forming a
"homestead society" once it's obtained. A forum wouldn't be as large a complex
as most individual buildings built by large corporations. Local zoning would
probably be the toughest hurdle! But again, since active work on such a
project isn't an immediate goal, there's little reason to get excited over the
subject.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul


Subject:	Yet more Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 09:17:52 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-13 19:19:22 EDT, Gaius Lupinius Festus writes:

<<
I enjoyed reading through all the replies and seeing the differing views
being
offered. So, here I go again!

Glad to see that you're just interested in lively discussion... I was a little
worried there for a while! ;)

> The imaginitive picture of a new Roman Forum serving as a research center,
and
as a religious center for Roman style pagans {I would also hope Christian and
Jewish Romans would add some chapels and synagogues to round the picture out}
is a very pretty picture. But again, let's look at it pragmatically.

The goals and focus of Nova Roma have been pretty well laid out on the
Website. As always, we welcome Citizens of all faiths, and have no interest
whatever in private religion. The Public religious focus of Nova Roma will
continue to be Republican Pagan, even though Christian and Jewish folks are
welcome in all aspects of Nova Roma.

> Classical studies are already being carried out very well in classical
studies
departments in universities and liberal arts institutions. There are also a
plethora of fine scholars out there. I am sure everyone has a favorite. And
research in other areas, such as medicine and the physical sciences are also
booming in these non-Roman institutes. Why spend the resources trying to re-
invent the wheel, when it is extremely unlikely that the New Rome would come
anywhere close to matching, let alsone leading the world in such endeavors?

There's a vast difference between research for research's sake, and study
toward application... Nova Roma exists to make USE of the ancient ways in
addition to intellectual preservation.

> I think the better and more practical way to imagine and plan for Nova
Roma's
future is to ask one central question: What can Nova Roma offer that the
other nations, colleges, research institutes, and labs cannot offer? The
possible answers to that question are the directions future planning should
take.

Again, the answer is simple. Nova Roma has been created so that people
interested in aspects of Classical Roman culture may have the resources, and
contacts, to manifest ancient Roman culture within the modern world. Scholars
catalog the ancient virtues and beliefs... we seek to live them in daily life.
And, to forstall more debate, that does NOT mean turning one's back on modern
society and trying to live in the past. I personally find that ancient Roman
culture gives me a far deeper understanding of the modern world than most
"popular culture" folks are able to gain, and this improves the quality of
life in many ways. Nobody is suggesting we take the Amish and Mennonite route,
and give up technology, etc.

> One of the replies to my original note on this subject mentioned having a
place where pagans could be pagans without risk of persecution. Those were
not the exact words used, but the point was there. If this is a motivation
for some, than i answer, "calm yourselves". There is nothing at all to
prevent anyone here, pagan or not, to carry out such worship if you so
desire.
Unless one wishes to revert to animal and human sacrifice, or re-institute
the
orders of temple prostitutes {such as the Mellisae} or introduce the use of
illegal narcotics into worship, Nova Romans should have no problems with the
state. I do not know of any citizens in Iran,where such trouble should be
expected. It is just that the idea of having a "refuge" in case of legal
persecution seems to me to smack of a bit of hysteria. I have plenty of
faith
in the saftey of religious liberty in my country.

I'm imagining that "freedom from prosecution" might well be read as "freedom
to practice without harassment, ridicule, etc". Nobody is waving a "prosecuted
pagan victim" flag here I hope!

> One final thought, which may ruffle a few feathers. I raised my eyebrows at
the remarks concerning the Jews "run in" with Paul of Tarsus. I fail to see
what Paul has to do with any of this. Paul was a loyal Roman citizen, who
broke no laws, and there is no evidence that he was not a citizen or that he
caused the Roman state trouble. It should be mentioned that in the two great
revolts against the Rome by the Jews in the years following Jesus life, the
Christians wrere not even involved, to the disgust of Jews. They knew very
well that the kingdom of God of which Jesus and Paul spoke would not be
ushered in by a revolt against Rome. You could say that Jesus and Paul were
both good friends of Rome.

I can't personally help but view Paul as anything but an enemy of Roman
culture. He worked to destroy the Pax Deorum through conversion and agitation.
I don't have a problem with Christianity per se... but when the Christian goal
is to wipe out all other forms of worship and religion I get a little touchy.
Paul did not advocate peaceful existance between religions by any means.

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul


Subject:	This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 09:25:43 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-13 19:35:05 EDT, Gaius Lupinius Festus writes:

<<
Yes. A virus which infected people into believing the Emperor was just a man
after all, and not a god. A virus which reduced the number of "johns" the
Melssisae and similar "priestesses" could rent themselves out to, in the name
of some goddess of love. A virus which did not have such "religious rites"
as
the circuses and bestiarri. Gibbon's naive view is passe now.

Please, this all could use some cooling down! There's little good that's going
to come out of focusing on the worst of ANY society, Roman or Christian. All
civilizations have had their terrible and brutal sides... Rome had it's
Colliseum, the Church had it's Inquisition.

The only sensible thing for the modern "historical enthusiast" to do is to try
and make use of the best aspects from ALL the ancient world.

> What am I getting out of Nova Roma? No more than I expected. As a non-
scholar who is not in college majoring in classdical studies, it is a slight
touch with the past and a civilization I happen to find interesting. It is
certainly not a "cause" to me, nor is it a source of religious inspiration to
me. It is for me a voluntary society of people with a common interest. Will
it ever be more? Let's first see if it survives it's founders.

If you have an interest in ancient Rome, you're certainly welcome. Please do
remember that we're trying to work with the positive aspects of antiquity,
rather than trying to create modern divisions over things that have passed.

Will Nova Roma survive it's founders? Almost assuredly... there are a lot of
skilled and knowledgable peole involved, and Rome is too important a subject
to abandon.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 10:39:12 -0400

>>
>>Nathan Hicks wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not a person to be politic with words, so I'll just say it:
>>> the thinning of true Roman blood and culture by foreign peoples
>>> and manners was the ruin of Rome, When a nation depends
>>> upon the servitude of foreign races, it is ruinous more to the
>>> conquerors than to the conquered.
>>
p>
>Take it as it please you, Claudia. This doesn't concern the
>matter of Eugenics which you blush so coyly at--although
>the ancient Romans might have better heeded this advice:

>'Cave ne canes trans saepem saliant ad saliendum.'

>And, yes, I'll offer that bit of Latin as a law.
>Nathan Hicks, Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus
>
Salvete
But Rustici, who will vote on it if they don't understand it. Pray
tell what does it mean? Certianly guard the dogs over the fence.... I
couldn't find "saliant ad Saliendum"
Lucius


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 10:43:36 -0400

>
>Here's my thought about the Official Languages proposal:
>a Latinless Rome might as well be Walhalla, Michigan, IMO.
>By requiring a translation of Latin into English and none of
>English into Latin, no greater station is given to Latin than
>to any other of the secondary languages--which this motion
>equally provides for as an accompaniment to the English
>version. If we wish Latin to have true legitimacy in Nova
>Roma, it must have the power to write law, not just to pro-
>mulgate what has been set down in another language.
>
>I'm sure Saevus' and Sergius' opinion is more favored than
>mine. But I think that, although the lines of a Latin passage
>stand as formidably as do a legion's, such an array is no less
>inspiring to behold.
>Nathan Hicks,Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus

Salvete
Many, if not most States, schools and colleges have mottos in
untranslated Latin. There is a place for it in Nova Roma.
Lucius


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:03:23 -0400

Ave et Salvete Quirites

>>>us) cannot yet read Latin, and if I don't get that passive form of the
>>>verb, I may *never* read Latin.
>>
I by no means am fluent in Latin, but I'm working on it.
>>
>>we want everyone to understand what is going on. .
>
>This law could become practically permanent. Could you imagine, two
>hundred years from now, an unscrupulous poliitician taking advantage of
>the loophole in order to push through a bill? I certainly can.
>
Such an attempt would be laughably transparent, I think.
>>
>>
>>Good Grief! How did you come to the conclusion I have a dislike for you?
As
>>a matter of fact I almost always agree with AND/OR (hehe) enjoy what you
>>have to say.
>
>I presumed it by your downright angry dismissal of my perfectly good
>points. Since it wasn't reasonable for you to be so curt in a civil
>conversation, I assumed you had other reasons.
>
>>
Sorry to have offended you, I really am not very eloquent in the written
word, that is why I try to be brief :-)
>>
>>>Three possibilities:
>>You see some things should be in Latin, at the presant time Religious
>>things.
>
>. . . Which are all also written in English, because while some of us
>can pronounce Latin, we still can't read it fluently. So #1 and #2
>still stand, without a need for #3.
>
>>
I was really thinking of mottos and formulae et cetera.
>>
>>>Now, stop being an ass,
>>
>>You really didn't need to stoop to calling me an ass.
>
>You're right. I didn't. It was improper of me. I apologize.
>--M. Gladius Saevus
>
Good enough, Thanks. Let us be good Romans and agree to disagree. Although I
really wish I could convince you that no one will vote for something that
they don't understand.

Vale et Valete L Equitius Cincinnatus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:14:44 -0400

->>The city of Rome fell very soon after
>> the Vestals were expelled and the Altar of Victory was removed from the
>> Senate. Thereafter it ceased to be any sort of center of civilization or
>> power.
>>
>See what happens when you eliminate the Vestal Virgins?
>-- F. Claudia
>
Salvete
OH NO! :-) Here we go again! hehe. I say bring back the Vestals (in
some form) and get those altars set back up.
Valete L Equitius


Subject:	Shaker like??
From:	amethystcrystallight@--------)
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 10:26:51 -0500

Somebody wrote:

>Maybe we should think of Nova Roma more in
>terms of having a modified sort of Shaker community- at least in part.
>They accepted all people and were a very productive community in their
>heyday while being mostly autonomous within the confines of the U.S. The
>only reason they are almost gone is because of the religious trappings
>of celibacy in their beliefs. We could use a lot of what they did as a
>model- in a very modified way. Use what works- to the point of having a
>living vibrant community of some sort . Part of the mission of Nova
>Roma is to rebuild the Religio Romana and I really couldn't think of a
>better way.

In the days of trying to "fit in" and being a "good Christian" I was VERY
close to joining the Mennonite Church (Mennonite Brethren, specifically).
They belong in the category with Shakers, Amish and the like.
Simplicity was their Motto (Mother Ann said "Give your hands to work and
your heart to God"). I will spare all the boring historical stuff, but
it's fascinating. If I was gonna be a Christian, I would be Mennonite or
Shaker (just cant stomach the stuff). We would likely last longer if we
didn't follow the celibacy angle, but other than that...they had their
act together. However, they weren't political in any way shape or form.
Nova Roma strikes me as a smidge political (from the view of a born and
bred Chicagoian <G>), but I can live with it.

BTW....if we are gonna start a little Shaker like village, I am more than
willing to relocate. Minneapolis has NO housing and I am ready to blow
this pop stand. Just tell me where to be and I'm there :-).

Vale!!!!!
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Amethystia Ivnia Crystallina and Primus Ivnia Terrelina
amethystcrystallight@--------


Subject:	Re: elvis in dreamland
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" germanicus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:49:17 -0400

Nope, it's always been $5 a year.

Germanicus

-----Original Message-----
From: R-------- razenna@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Saturday, August 15, 1998 1:23 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: elvis in dreamland

>From: R-------- razenna@--------
>
>m--------oon@-------- wrote:> >
>> Oddly enough, for more scholarly clarification on this topic, see this
>> month's EAGLE. Only $5 a year, such a bargain.
>> -- F. Claudia
>>
>
>$5 a year! I thought Germanicus was hawking the Eagle for $3 a year.
>
>Ericius
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
>to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at <a href="http://www.onelist.com" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com</a> and
>select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.


Subject:	Rome and the Eastern Empire
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 12:38:27 EDT

Palladius has raised a good and interesting point. In the dispute of whether
or not the surviving Eastern Empire was "Roman", he mentions a an incident of
a sports event in which Hispanic citizens {I presume they were citizens} of
the US were cheering for the Mexican team over and against the US team. His
point being that obviously there is a significant cultural and national
identity difference here to make one wonder if the Hispanics in the stands
could be really considered part of a common US culture.

After I read the notes this morning, I went to the periodontist to get my gum
problems evaluated, and while sitting in the chair, I truned my thoughts to
this. To what extent may a nation have cultural variation without fragmenting
into separate nations? I doubt anyone would seriosly deny that the Manhattan
stock broker, the Appalachian miner, the Midwestern Farmer, and the California
surfer are all representative of a vast and diverse US culture. But how far
can their be a variety before there ceases to be unity?

Concerning the Hispanics watching the game, cheering for the Mexican side
rather than the US team, I would say that most likely, these people really
have no interest in being part of the US except in an economic way. My
experience with Latinos suggests to me that their primary motivation is to
reap economic benefits from residency in the US, without a thought given to
taking an active part in the culture or in assimilating to any degree. I see
this in my work at the MVA. On the other hand, I have seen people from Asia
setting up lives here, and trying to strike a balance between "being American"
and remaining Chinese, or Cambodian, or whathaveyou.
They desire to remain Asian to an extent {and who could blame them?} and yet
they also want to be red, white, and blue. This is quite a task, considering
that unlike the Hispanics, they come from the other side of the world, from a
vastly different culture.

So what does all this have to do with Rome and the Eastern Empire? Well, I do
not think Palladius illustration is an accurate parallel. The culture and
people of the eastern empire had a tremendous impact on Rome as it was
expending and developing. The Hellenism it bequeathed to Rome was assimilated
by Rome, and thus the eastern culture became part of Rome. When Rome finally
fell, the East was still there, retaining this same heritage {we may call it
Greco-Roman} and still living under the same governmental framework that
existed in the West, prior to the Wests collapse. It seems tome then, that to
consider the East part of the Roman world one minute, and then to be something
totally different the next, is simplistic and unrealistic.

Identical with the West? No. But so different as to be "Non-Roman"? Again,
no. The Eastern Empire is better thought of as being reflective of the
tendency of large nations to have cultures both similar and common, as well as
varied, in much the same way as the broker, the farmer, the miner, and the
surfer are all part of the mega-US culture, but varied.

Gaius Lupinius Festus


Subject:	Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 13:25:08 EDT

Palladius has asked me what rot had already set in to bring about the fall
of the Western Empire, before Constantine. He and Dexipius are of the opinion
that the fall of Rome was the result of the ascendency of Christianity as the
Imperial Religion, and the negect of the Roman Gods. I disagree, and enter a
plea of "not guilty" for the Roman Christians.

First, let me repeat an earlier question. If Christianity was the cause of
Rome's collapse, why did the Eastern Empire survive another thousand years?
The counter argument that the Eastern Empire was not Roman completely evades
and sidesteps the point. The fact is that the Eastern Empire too was a land
in which the old pagan divinities were worshipped. Indeed, Some of Rome's
deities were direct borrowings from the east, while others {Jupiter, Minerva,
Juno} were combinations of Etruscan and Greek elements. So the question
remains. If Rome fell as a result of Imperial Christainity, and the negelct
of pagan gods, why did the east not go down with it?
The pagan gods were also replaced with Christ in the East as well as in the
West. If you mix copper and zinc in Rome and in Constantinople, you will get
bronze in both places. So the result should have been the same.

My answer is that the ingredients for Rome's fall were already present
before Constantine's religious experience which led him into Christainity.

What were these ingredients, this rot?

1. Military rot---Augustus military arrangements on the frontiers worked for
a time, but could not last. Eventually, barbarians, with constant exposure to
Roman forces, will learn to FIGHT like Romans, thus making the playing field
more level. To maintain military superiority on frontiers would require two
things:

a} vast sums of money
b} inventivness in technology

2. Economic rot---Inflated currecy reached a crisis which was temporarily
dealt with by Diocletian. The oppressive taxation to maintain government and
military drained the financial resources of the state. Totalitarian laws
restricting one to the same trade as the father {so that the government could
help itself to your labor and production} stifled enterprise, and so further
rotted the economic base. The best way to kill your civilization from the
inside is todestroy your economic base.

3. Lack of inventivness---The Romans did not maintain a lead over their
enemies in military technology. Their ballistae did not give them any great
advantage. They did not go on to invent gunpowder so the barbarians could be
blown away.

4. Governmental instability----the Romans never solved the problem of how to
ensure the peaceful continuence of the Principate. When your armies are
warring with each other to place their own commanders on the throne, you will
have mega-crap going down. A means of ensuring some kind of undoubted
sucession would mean some lousy rulers, but at least usurpers would be known
for what they were, and the beaurocratic machinery could at least keep some
governmental order going, as it did under Caligula.

5. Educational rot---tied to the lack of inventiveness is the sad fact that
Roman education was not widespread enough and was not deep enough. Roman
education centered on rhetoric, not on natual science, philosophy, and
mathematics. Rhetoric is the art of BSing your hearers, so that it leads them
to believe:
a} a stupid idea is a work of genius
b} that you actually know what you are talking about, despite the hidden
fact that you are as ignorant on the matter as the man on the moon,
c} that you have the listeners best interests at heart....{we jest want to
hep you son!}
Rhetoric is a good education for a sophist and a lawyer out to make a quick
sesterce, but will not equip a nation to carry on indefinitely, growing,
meeting new challenges and obstacles.

All these problems, coupled with the mass population movements of non-Roman
tribes during the last calm age of Antoninus Pius, getting ready for the large
scale incursions into Roman territory, sowed the seeds of destruction for
Rome. If Constantine and his successors are to be blamed for anything, let
them be blamed for not doing any better than their pagan predeccessors in
rolling back forever the tides of destruction. Indeed, one cannot see how
they could have done so.

By the way, Palladius. If you wish to call Constantine an opportunist, that
is your right. But please remember that that title can be equally applied to
virtually the entire Senatorial role and the bigoted Patrician "optimates"
from the time of the Battle of Lake Regillus to the death of Antony. At any
rate, this thesis that Christianity is somehow to blame is too simplistic and
belongs to the bygone days of Gibbon as a relic of bad historiography.

Gaius Lupinius
Festus


Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:04:20 EDT

Salve Consul!

I like your posts here the best. You speak with a clear-headedness and clarity
unmatched by anyone else here, save one, which modesty forbids me to mention!

The goals of Nova Roma as you state them are not goals I have problems with.
I do like Rome and am interested in Rome. {Otherwise, I would never have
bothered to join in the first place}. But my initial postings here, which
were only intended to call attention to some practical concerns have attracted
a few questionable and somewhat off-topic responses. I mean the unrealistic
accusations leveled against one faith of the ancient empire. As a
philosophical monotheist myself, when someone blames a monotheistic religion
for the fall of Rome, I have to object. I try to see both sides of those
ancient controversies. I can see how ancient pagan Romans could see the
Christians as a danger to the state. I can also understand and sympathize
with the Christians; if you are certain you have something wonderful, you are
duty-bound to share it. Suppose you and I found a collection of magnificently
preserved Roman texts, such as Claudius autobiography, and that we keopt them
hidden, reading and enjoying them ourselves. We would be rightly accused of a
pure selfishness. Likwise, inthe days when people were looking to mystery
religions to satisfy spiritual longings which the Religio Romana could not
meet, one sect from Judea became convinced {rightly or wrongly} that they had
something great that would bless everyone, from the Emperor to the lowest
slave. From this perspective, they HAD to be a missionary faith. If a man
worships a god, and believes this god is real and blesses him, and then makes
no attempt to share this faith, however tactfully, he is a thoughtless rogue.
If a Roman takes the view that love and reverence for Apollo is not worthy of
missionary activity, and that faith in Apollo can be taken or left, that it is
just a matter of taste, then I have to conclude that Apollo is not very
important to this man after all, and that his pagan faith is just some
psychological fun and games. With all due respect to Claudia, I cannot see
her "faith" in Vesta as very significant or imoportant, as she herself
compares it to so trivial a matter as selecting a flavor of ice cream. So,
whether you agree or disagree with Paul's beliefs, I have to commend him for
his moxey. He stayed loyal to the state, incited no rebellions, did not evade
paying taxes or encourage others to do so, and made very hard and dangerous
journeys along the Roman roads and sea ways, trying to bring something he
thought more permanent and hopeful to the lives of other Romans and
provincials.

Pax, Gaius L. Festus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:25:01 -0700


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:30:19 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 15:14:52 EDT, you write:

<< Ah Dex, you're not one of those Italians who are under the
mistaken impression they are descended from the Romans when for the most
part they are descended from the the Vandals, Visigoths and such? ;)
>>

Ah no...just going with the flow. I do have relatives in Rome proper but
that's probably the extent of it! : )

--Dexippus <just wants to be emperor! LOL>


Subject:	Re: A Temporal Nova Roma
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:30:57 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 15:23:43 EDT, you write:

<< With, or Withour Whipped Cream? >>

With Cream! Always with Cream!

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:35:41 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 15:33:38 EDT, you write:

<< I would like to know where the original post was sent. If this is a
vote that was sent to the Censors then it is very inappropriate for a vote
to be posted on the list.
As to the ambiguous language, I have already said that is how I
MEANT to write it. So why do we still hear complants about it? Although I do
not see how "Either Latin and/or English" is ambiguous. >>

I understand that is how you meant to have it implied, but I still hold to the
notion that an "implied" is too broad for any official use. You can point out
real-life examples (i.e. The Bill of Rights) and such, but I for one would
like to avoid any future mis-uses or abuses of an official language bid by
clearly defining its use and function.

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:36:35 -0700

-----Original Message-----
From: D. Iunius Palladius amcgrath@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 8:05 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul

>From: "D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
>
>
>On Fri, 14 Aug 1998 AstUs---------------- wrote:
>
>> From: AstUs----------------
>
>> The Byzantine Empire was part of the Roman Empire. It's laws were a
>> codification of Roman Law, and it's people thought of themselves as
Romans
>> {they were all, save for slaves, Roman citizens, thanks to Caracalla} and
>> continued to think so after the Western half had fallen. What
"de-Romanized"
>> them? Certainly not the fall of the actual city?!?! If possession of
the
>> city makes one Roman, then Nova Romans are not Romans either. Was it the
fact
>> that the Byzantine Empire was a Christian Empire? If so, then why not
alter
>> the Nova Roma constitution to allow only worshippers of Roman gods to be
>> citizens?
>> The Byzantines certainly were Romans. If Nova Romans consider
themselves
>> Roman by virtue of their emphasis on the word "nova", then remember that
>> Constantinole was called "New Rome" when it was innaugurated as the
Imperial
>> Capital. The Byzantines have as good a claim, if not better, to be
considered
>> Romans.
>
>The Byzantines considered themselves Greeks with only a passing nod to
>their Roman legacy. They spoke Greek, their art was Greek, they lived in
>the Eastern Mediterranean which was always more Hellenic than Roman. Even
>Julian, admired by many Roman neo-pagans barely spoke Latin. They always
>saw a vast cultural difference between themselves and the west. This
>continued long into the Christian era when they had nothing but animosity
>and distrust for the west, even before the Crusades.

The Byzantines felt that they themselves were better than anyone else. If
you read The Mission of Lord Ludiprand, they fully believed that they
carried the tradition and mission of the Roman Empire. They even attempted
to reunify it until the 7th Century CE.

The distrust that occured was due to their maintaince of Western
Civilization during a time when it was recognized that the Classical
civilization of Greece and Rome was breaking down and transforming itself in
the West. Hence, the West developed a new cohesive culture while the East
was a mirror as to what the Roman Civilization and Greek Culture once was.
Imperial, religious (despite the fact that it was Christian) and pompous.
However, it was not the same civilization of the Roman Republic. Remember
it was mirroring the Empire, not the Republic.

If you havent guessed, I really enjoy Byzantine History. I feel it is very
underrated in terms of its contributions to Western Civilization.

I will get off my soapbox now!

Lucius Cornelius Sulla

>Palladius
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>
> Non scholae sed vitae discimus.
>
> Seneca
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
> "Such things have often happened and still happen,
> and how can these be signs of the end of the world?"
>
> Julian, Emperor of Rome 361-363 A.D.
> Extant 331-363 A.D.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Help support ONElist, while generating interest in your product or
>service. ONElist has a variety of advertising packages. Visit
><a href="http://www.onelist.com/advert.html" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/advert.html</a> for more information.
>


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:40:44 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 18:10:31 EDT, you write:

<< Then how do you explain the fact that the Eastern Empire lived on for
another
thousand years? >>

I don't and don't care to! The Eastern Empire was not "Roman"...though it may
have been an extension of Rome, it's capital was not Rome and it's citizens
were not Roman. It may be that I oversimplify, but for me The True Roman
Empire was only that in which the city of Rome was the capital and held all
political and socio-economic sway. Throughout history, after the fall of
Rome, many claimed to be the ressurrected empire. To quote Michael Meyer's
Linda Richman..."The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an
Empire...DISCUSS!"

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Kaiser Karl I / Charlemagne
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:44:10 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 18:51:33 EDT, you write:

<< Hmm, when did the Holy Roman Empire die out?

Emperor Franz II abolished it in 1806. >>

Exactly my point...see my earlier post-reply to Festus. The Holy Roman Empire
was not THE Roman Empire. Again...I may be oversimplifying, but for me, Rome
ceased being an Empire when the city of Rome ceased being the capital. I am
not including the Eastern or Ottoman Empire in this timeline or the Holy Roman
Empire of Emperor Franz II...these weren't Roman! They were built upon the
model of Rome and took the name...that is where it ends.

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:46:59 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 19:39:51 EDT, you write:

<< I admire that -- to have one's tongue so firmly in one's cheek.
I'd end up biting my off, but then, I'm clumsy with my mouth. (Shut up,
Dexippe! I hear your thoughts!) *grins* >>

Oh Saevus...you're getting to know me too well! : P~~~

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Kaiser Karl I / Charlemagne
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:47:30 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 20:03:38 EDT, you write:

<< Of course, as Voltaire said, it wasn't any of the three.... >>

Oh? Voltaire was a fan of Saturday Night Live too?

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:44:59 -0700

-----Original Message-----
From: Ira Adams iadams@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 9:13 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul

>From: Ira Adams iadams@--------
>
>> The Byzantine Empire was part of the Roman Empire. It's laws were a
>>codification of Roman Law, and it's people thought of themselves as Romans
>>{they were all, save for slaves, Roman citizens, thanks to Caracalla} and
>>continued to think so after the Western half had fallen. What
"de-Romanized"
>>them? Certainly not the fall of the actual city?!?! If possession of the
>>city makes one Roman, then Nova Romans are not Romans either. Was it the
>>fact
>>that the Byzantine Empire was a Christian Empire? If so, then why not
alter
>>the Nova Roma constitution to allow only worshippers of Roman gods to be
>>citizens?
>> The Byzantines certainly were Romans. If Nova Romans consider
>>themselves
>>Roman by virtue of their emphasis on the word "nova", then remember that
>>Constantinole was called "New Rome" when it was innaugurated as the
Imperial
>>Capital. The Byzantines have as good a claim, if not better, to be
>>considered
>>Romans.
>
>So, to follow your reasoning, the inhabitants of New York, living in a
>city named after an older one many hundreds of miles across the sea,
>speaking a crude approximation of the same English language, and
>following laws based upon English law, are really Englishmen (and women).
>Is that right? Riiiiight!

No, the difference is that we Rebelled against the British. The Byzantines
did not, they inherited that right when Constantine moved the Capital, the
Senate, and the heads of Government form a very dangerously threatened site,
to a more defensible site.

>The Byzantines were to Rome as "Small Soldiers" are to the U. S. Army.
>The Byzantines gave rise to the Ottoman and Russian empires, while Rome
>gave rise to European national states and the U. S. -- look at the
>fundamental differences between them in religions, in languages (the
>Byzantines used Greek, for Heaven's sake [whoops -- can I say "Heaven"
>here?]), in basic political and social philosophies. They were ORIENTALS.

The Byzantine Empire did not "give" rise to the Ottoman Empire. The Turks
conquered it in May 29, 1453, with their Cannons brought by a Catholic from
Hungary.

They Byzantines did assist the Russian Empire, through conversion to Eastern
Orthodox, by civilizing them and exposing them to a taste of classical
civiliztion, and their biggest influence is by codifying their language, the
Cyrillic Alphabet.

>[What's happened? This list has never been such fun before!]
>
>L. Sergius Aust.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
>to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at <a href="http://www.onelist.com" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com</a> and
>select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.
>


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:52:21 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 20:51:26 EDT, you write:

<< Again, why would we ever do this, we want everyone to understand what is
going on. Think about this, if you received a message in a language you
didn't understand what would you do? Find out what it meant, ignore it,
throw it out. We're trying to get things done so why waste time sending
messages hardly anyone gets. >>

I understand your logic but after having been involved in many different types
of organizations, one can not allow for even the slightest chance of abuse or
misinterpretation. Doing so eventually leads to the few trying to control the
many and leaving the entire organization in dissaray at the disbelief that
some would attempt to take advantage of such a loop-hole. I'm not saying that
any of us presently would...only that there is always the possibility.

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 11:51:58 -0700

-----Original Message-----
From: Dexippus@-------- Dexippus@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Saturday, August 15, 1998 11:41 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul

>From: Dexippus@--------
>
>In a message dated 98-08-14 18:10:31 EDT, you write:
>
><< Then how do you explain the fact that the Eastern Empire lived on for
>another
> thousand years? >>
>
>I don't and don't care to! The Eastern Empire was not "Roman"...though it
may
>have been an extension of Rome, it's capital was not Rome and it's citizens
>were not Roman. It may be that I oversimplify, but for me The True Roman
>Empire was only that in which the city of Rome was the capital and held all
>political and socio-economic sway. Throughout history, after the fall of
>Rome, many claimed to be the ressurrected empire. To quote Michael Meyer's
>Linda Richman..."The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an
>Empire...DISCUSS!"

Umm, lets not plagarize history, it was Voltaire who said that first!

But I very much disagree, The Byzantine Empire was Roman, and until the 7th
Century Latin was the official language in government and business, it was
after they lost most of their territory to the Muslims that Greek began to
take a more important role. Even their magistrates had the same names as
the "Whole Roman Empire." Prior to Theodius the Great (sp) division in 395
CE.

>--Dexippus
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Help support ONElist, while generating interest in your product or
>service. ONElist has a variety of advertising packages. Visit
><a href="http://www.onelist.com/advert.html" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/advert.html</a> for more information.
>


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 14:59:37 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-14 22:56:43 EDT, you write:

<< The Byzantines have as good a claim, if not better, to be considered
Romans. >>

I would tend to disagree. What made one a Roman was being part of the Empire
that held it's capital in Rome. After Rome ceased to be the point of power,
those who remained within the "Empire" became Byzantians.

No one in this organization ever claimed to be "Roman"...we've always claimed
to be spiritual decendants which allows for a wide array of interpretation and
inclusion. Therefore, one doesn't have to be a worshipper of the Ancient
Roman Deities to be a citizen of Nova Roma.

And for calling Constantinople New Rome, Massachusettes, New Hampshire, and
Connecticut are referred to as New England but since July 4, 1776, residents
of these three states ceased being English by any right.

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 15:04:14 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 00:03:08 EDT, you write:

<< However, I trust that you, since you do not consider the entire Eastern
Empire
as worthy of the name "Roman" {try telling that to the REAL Romans, if they
were still alive today} would ask that Nova Roma's Territorial Claims be
altered so as not to claim any of the lands of the Eastern Empire.

Can't have it both ways folks!

By the way, so what if Latin was not widely used in the Eastern Empire. Most
Nova Romans don't know Latin either! >>

You are most obviously missing the point here. There are no "real" Romans to
ask so your point is null. And Nova Roma never declared ourselves to be the
"true" Romans so any and all lands that wish to join us are welcome to. This
includes South America and North America which never saw a Roman presence.

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: The Eagle
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 15:08:58 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 00:55:15 EDT, you write:

<< Dex, did you take out a subscription? I didn't see you on the mailing
list? August is being mailed this weekend.
>>

yes! Talk to Germanicus. I paid for my subscription with the first issue.

--Dexippus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Nathan Hicks moman@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 16:59:41 -0400

Lucius wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >'Cave ne canes trans saepem saliant ad saliendum.'
>
> But Rustici, who will vote on it if they don't understand it. Pray
> tell what does it mean? Certianly guard the dogs over the fence.... I
> couldn't find "saliant ad Saliendum"
> Lucius

The spirit is one of "Careful that the bitch doesn't get over the wall."

It was a bit tasteless, perhaps. :)

Nathan Hicks
Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus


Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	SDmtwi@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 17:49:23 EDT

Salvete,

Festus says of ancient Christians and worshippers in general, "From this
perspective, they HAD to be a missionary faith. If a man worships a god, and
believes this god is real and blesses him, and then makes no attempt to share
this faith, however tactfully, he is a thoughtless rogue."
This is, of course, an incorrect statement. The reason Christianity is a
missionary faith is because Christians believe that they have (only) one
lifetime in which to save the souls of those around them. A Christian who
does not attempt to convert the faithless is ignoring those who are in peril
of eternal damnation. Also, Jesus the Christ commanded Christians to preach
the word. In like manner, Moslems and Buddhists are exhorted by their
founders to spread the faith.
There is no such exortation on the part of the Olympian deities. A man who
worships Apollo with his entire being is not a "thoughtless rogue" if he fails
to convert anyone to Apollo's worship. This is especially so because
Classical belief held that right and wrong actions, rather than worship of any
particular God, determined one's fate after death. Festus is correct when he
avers that the worshipper would be remiss for believing that "love and
reverence for Apollo is not worthy of missionary activity."
However, he goes too far when he concludes that non-missionary religions are
just "psychological fun and games." For the Romans, which deity(ies) one
dedicated one's self to was a matter of taste. This does not invalidate the
faith, nor does it imply that the faithful are any less dedicated or pious.
The worshipper fails to participate in missionary activity not because he
feels his religion to be unworthy of such activity, but rather because such
activity is beside the point.

Valete,
T. Labienus Fortunatus


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 15:08:09 PDT

&g--------om: "Na-------- Hicks" moman@-------- >
>
>Here's my thought about the Official Languages proposal:
>a Latinless Rome might as well be Walhalla, Michigan, IMO.
>By requiring a translation of Latin into English and none of
>English into Latin, no greater station is given to Latin than
>to any other of the secondary languages--which this motion
>equally provides for as an accompaniment to the English
>version. If we wish Latin to have true legitimacy in Nova
>Roma, it must have the power to write law, not just to pro-
>mulgate what has been set down in another language.
>
>I'm sure Saevus' and Sergius' opinion is more favored than
>mine. But I think that, although the lines of a Latin passage
>stand as formidably as do a legion's, such an array is no less
>inspiring to behold.

A very good point. Of course, it takes more than speaking and writing
Latin to be a Roman. But still, a good point. Latin should have an
honored place.

I agree with your assessment of Latin. When trying to read Latin, I
even *feel* more intelligent. ;) It's a great language, set along
almost logical lines, with very little irregularity yet enough variation
to be poetic.

But look at it this way: after the Norman invasion of England, French
became the "official" language of law and business, while "English" (I
use that term advisedly, since it was mostly Anglo-saxon, and not yet
what *we* would consider English) was the language of farmers and
peasants. What did this mean? It meant that yet another gap was set
between rural folk and the city folk, that of language. Do you know
why, in English, it's a "pig" while alive, and "pork" when on the table?
Because "pig" comes from Anglo-Saxon, spoken by the farmers who raised
the animals, and "pork" comes from French, spoken by the aristocrates
who ate the pig. Same with "cow"/"beef", "chicken"/"poultry" and so on.

If we're building a society here, or rebuilding one (and aren't we?)
then we have to be most careful about those things that *define* a
society. One of those things is language, arguably the most important
one. After all, Rustice, if this bill passes, it'll give you and the
other Latin scholars a secret language with which to communicate, and
that'll annoy nosey people like myself to no end. ;)

Making Latin an honorary official language, while still providing
translations into other languages for those of us who cannot speak
Latin, might not be so objectionable. Even if it contained a clause
that made Latin the sole official language within, say, 50 years? I
could agree to that.

BTW, if we do make Latin the official language, then we're going to need
to coin some words. "email" for instance. And "web-page."
"Telephone,", "computer" . . . should we form an Academia Latina for
such things?

--M. Gladius Saevus


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 15:14:06 PDT

>Salvete
> Many, if not most States, schools and colleges have mottos in
>untranslated Latin. There is a place for it in Nova Roma.
> Lucius

Having an official language doesn't *prohibit* the use of untranslated
Latin. Just not for official government business. While many states
have mottos in Latin, not one of them writes laws in any other langugae
than English.

--M. Gladius Saevus


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 15:19:29 PDT

>Good enough, Thanks. Let us be good Romans and agree to disagree.
Although I
>really wish I could convince you that no one will vote for something
that
>they don't understand.
>
> Vale et Valete L Equitius Cincinnatus

Of course we'll agree to disagree. This is, after all, only politics.

You're probably right. I just don't want to gamble on a "probably."
Right now, no one would ever vote for a bill that they couldn't
understnad, but what about when there are hundreds of bills going
through? What about misunderstandings; it's easy to misunderstand
things in a language one cannot fluently read. There are nuances in
English that can insert loopholes into our laws -- I'm sure such nuances
exist in Latin as well, and since it's not our native language, I'm also
fairly sure we'll be less inclined to notice them at the outset.

--M. Gladius Saevus


Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	"Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 15:41:38 PDT

If a man
>worships a god, and believes this god is real and blesses him, and then
makes
>no attempt to share this faith, however tactfully, he is a thoughtless
rogue.
>If a Roman takes the view that love and reverence for Apollo is not
worthy of
>missionary activity, and that faith in Apollo can be taken or left,
that it is
>just a matter of taste, then I have to conclude that Apollo is not very
>important to this man after all, and that his pagan faith is just some
>psychological fun and games. With all due respect to Claudia, I cannot
see
>her "faith" in Vesta as very significant or imoportant, as she herself
>compares it to so trivial a matter as selecting a flavor of ice cream.
So,
>whether you agree or disagree with Paul's beliefs, I have to commend
him for
>his moxey. He stayed loyal to the state, incited no rebellions, did
not evade
>paying taxes or encourage others to do so, and made very hard and
dangerous
>journeys along the Roman roads and sea ways, trying to bring something
he
>thought more permanent and hopeful to the lives of other Romans and
>provincials.

Now yera picking on *my* patron, feste! :) Let's take this outside!

Seriously, though, the reason *I* don't proselytize is that I don't see
the need. I worship Apollo because Apollo strikes me as more alive and
real than Christ. But I admit the possibility that Christ might also
exist, and be as alive and real to someone else as Apollo is to me.
What's good to the goose is *not* good for the gander.

It's not so much that Christians want to share their religion that's
annoying (I could just as easily add prayers to Christ to my worship as
I can Sol Invictus), it's that they insist there are no other gods.

I admit that it's my dream that someday, temples will be rebuilt to
Apollo and people will come and worship again. I admit that's my dream,
and I also dream that people will convert to the worship of the Gods.
But I don't think knocking on doors saying, "Have you heard the word of
Apollo today?" is going to do much good.

But if people ask me, "well, what does your religion believe?" I"m more
than happy to talk their ear off.

M. Gladius Saevus


Subject:	Re: The Eagle
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 19:09:47 -0400

Dexippus@-------- wrote:
>
> From: Dexippus@--------
>
> In a message dated 98-08-15 00:55:15 EDT, you write:
>
> << Dex, did you take out a subscription? I didn't see you on the mailing
> list? August is being mailed this weekend.
> >>
>
> yes! Talk to Germanicus. I paid for my subscription with the first issue.
>
> --Dexippus

It's on it's way, babe. Can't wait to see you in the Emperor's gold
lamee toga! I keep thinking about Dom DeLuise in "History of the
World"... Now THAT was a toga!

-- Claudia


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 19:10:59 -0400

Nathan Hicks wrote:
>

&g--------rom: Na-------- Hicks moman@-------- >
> Lucius wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >'Cave ne canes trans saepem saliant ad saliendum.'
> >
> > But Rustici, who will vote on it if they don't understand it. Pray
> > tell what does it mean? Certianly guard the dogs over the fence.... I
> > couldn't find "saliant ad Saliendum"
> > Lucius
>
> The spirit is one of "Careful that the bitch doesn't get over the wall."
>
> It was a bit tasteless, perhaps. :)
>
> Nathan Hicks
> Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus
>
No, not for you, dear.
Rather late aren't you?

-- Claudia


Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 19:22:53 -0400

> It's not so much that Christians want to share their religion that's
> annoying (I could just as easily add prayers to Christ to my worship as
> I can Sol Invictus), it's that they insist there are no other gods.
>
> I admit that it's my dream that someday, temples will be rebuilt to
> Apollo and people will come and worship again. I admit that's my dream,
> and I also dream that people will convert to the worship of the Gods.
> But I don't think knocking on doors saying, "Have you heard the word of
> Apollo today?" is going to do much good.
>
> But if people ask me, "well, what does your religion believe?" I"m more
> than happy to talk their ear off.
>
The point, Saevus, is that you're not proselytizing for Apollo with the
fanatic's attitude that There Is Only One God And His Word Is The Only
Truth. If people ASK, that's one thing. If they're forced to listen,
through economic, medical or social necessity, that's another.

I think that "missionary activity" is one of the scourges of the earth,
because it so often hides fanaticism. The theory that the "heathen must
be converted" smacks to me of saying that the "heathen's" religion is
invalid and the "missionary's" is true. It is not an act of love for
humanity; it's an act of egotism.

I would say this even if the missionary was one of Vesta's and the
heathen was a Catholic. A priestess of Vesta has no more right to
invalidate another religion than a priest of Jehovah has that right.

-- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: Vestals
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 19:26:45 -0400

Lucius wrote:
>

> >See what happens when you eliminate the Vestal Virgins?
> >-- F. Claudia
> >
> Salvete
> OH NO! :-) Here we go again! hehe. I say bring back the Vestals (in
> some form) and get those altars set back up.
> Valete L Equitius
>

I'm so sorry I missed the first discussion on this subject (if
"discussion" is the word!), but don't worry about the Order of Vestals.
A proposal is coming shortly, as soon as The Eagle is taken care of.

-- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: A Temporal Nova Roma
From:	Megas-Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 17:34:13 -0700

Salus et Fortuna F. Claudia Juliana, Salve;

I can not claim originality in the Retro-Heathen reference. I
first read it in an article by a Friend on another Retro-Heathen Path.
He is Garman Lord, the Founder, and currently reigning Sacral King of
the Winlandish Rice of Theodish Belief (as chosen by the People and
Witan of the Rice).
The Theodish Belief practices an Anglo-Saxon version of the
Scandinavian Faith system to which I have been called. If you wish, I
shall send you the Theodish web address by private e-mail. Unless the
moderator thinks this would be appropriate to the open list.

Forgive me for what appears to be a non-sequitor to this post.
But, several years ago the U.S. Supreme Court did rule that animal
sacrifice is a protected religious practice. This ruling came out of a
Florida case involving the Religion of Santeria.

May the Blessings of the Holy Ones Continue for Thee and Thine,

S. Ullerius Venator


Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 20:42:06 -0400

> Palladius has asked me what rot had already set in to bring about the
fall
>of the Western Empire, before Constantine. He and Dexipius are of the
opinion
>that the fall of Rome was the result of the ascendency of Christianity as
the
>Imperial Religion, and the negect of the Roman Gods. I disagree, and enter
a
>plea of "not guilty" for the Roman Christians.
<<<<<complete snipage>>>>>
>By the way, Palladius. If you wish to call Constantine an opportunist,
that
>is your right. But please remember that that title can be equally applied
to
>virtually the entire Senatorial role and the bigoted Patrician "optimates"
>from the time of the Battle of Lake Regillus to the death of Antony. At
any
>rate, this thesis that Christianity is somehow to blame is too simplistic
and
>belongs to the bygone days of Gibbon as a relic of bad historiography.
>
> Gaius
Lupinius Festus

Salvete Omnes
Great stuff, makes me wonder what I'll see in the Eagle.... You are
contributing to the Eagle, aren't you?
Valete Cincinnatus


Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 21:20:19 -0400

>Fro--------Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
>
>Err what's the Eagle?
>Nic

Salve "Nic"
The Eagle is the monthly newsletter of Nova Roma that is sent out on
the Idvs of the month (check out the Calender for the day because the Idvs
is on different days in each month but always either the 15th or 13th).
Check out the Forum Romanum page for more info but it is $5 for a year
subscription. And BTW welcome Cives (citizen) .
Vale Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus, Praetor Urbanus

>>
>>Salvete Omnes
>> Great stuff, makes me wonder what I'll see in the Eagle.... You are
>>contributing to the Eagle, aren't you?
>> Valete Cincinnatus
>>
>


Subject:	Re: Vestals
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 21:21:50 -0400

--->
>> >See what happens when you eliminate the Vestal Virgins?
>> >-- F. Claudia
>> >
>> Salvete
>> OH NO! :-) Here we go again! hehe. I say bring back the Vestals
(in
>> some form) and get those altars set back up.
>> Valete L Equitius
>>
>
>I'm so sorry I missed the first discussion on this subject (if
>"discussion" is the word!), but don't worry about the Order of Vestals.
>A proposal is coming shortly, as soon as The Eagle is taken care of.
>
>-- F. Claudia
>
Ave et Salvete
Great! I can't wait to see it!
Vale Cincinnatus


Subject:	Re: My Name!!!
From:	Megas-Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 20:29:16 -0700

Salus et Fortuna Nicola, Salve!

Welcome to Nova Roma. As you'll see, this is a VERY lively group of
intellects. There is a lot of good information, passion and humor on
display. If you have any questions, ask away and you'll get sensory
overload from the answers. I'm sure, since you felt strong enough to
enter the e-lst, that you'll do fine.

Take your time on a name. There's not a wide, historical variety out
there for female Roman names. {{Check my spellings on these good
Citizens}} Usually the Praenomen (first name) is your birth order
(Prima - first, Secunda - second, Tertia - third...). The Gensnomen
(middle name) would be your Family (modernly, the last name) such as,
Ullerius a descendant of Uller. The cognomen (third and subsequent
names) would be some nickname based upon a physical attribute (Dona -
gifted, Pulchrituda - beautiful...), occupation (Venator - hunter,
Ambulator - peddler...), location (Germanicus, Africanus, Americus...)

Again, welcome from the resident Citizen from Ultima Thule.

May the Holy Ones send Thee and Thine Blessings!

S. Ullerius Venator

Post-Scriptum, I had a similar problem. My e-mail is in my wife's
name, so sometimes I get identified as Anita. So, I can sympathize.
>
> Fro--------Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
>
> By the way everyone, my name ISN@T Mike Dunn!
> It's Nicola Dunn.
> My dad's called Mike, and everytime I send an email his name gets sent. It's
> rather confusing I know but I'm trying to rectify the situation.
>
> Nic


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Nathan Hicks moman@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 21:45:41 -0400

m--------oon@-------- wrote:
>
> > It was a bit tasteless, perhaps. :)
> >
> > Nathan Hicks
> > Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus
>
> No, not for you, dear.
> Rather late aren't you?

Stay on your side of the wall, dear Claudia. I don't
like people who begin their personal attacks with a
reference to Nazism. For fifty years, it's been the
coda to every inept debater's comments, and now you
place it before the first period.

A pardon from poor taste is not yours to give.

Nathan Hicks
Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 21:31:52 -0400

>>I've been hoping Nova Roma was going to follow the example of the early
>Republic rather than that of the decadent, bungled, and unsuccessful
>Roman Empire. Time will tell.
>
>L. Sergius Aust.
>
Salvete
I too hope for the same thing.
Valete Cincinnatus


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 21:35:53 -0400

>>I'm sure Saevus' and Sergius' opinion is more favored than
>>mine. But I think that, although the lines of a Latin passage
>>stand as formidably as do a legion's, such an array is no less
>>inspiring to behold.
>
>A very good point. Of course, it takes more than speaking and writing
>Latin to be a Roman. But still, a good point. Latin should have an
>honored place.
>
,> it'll give you and the
>other Latin scholars a secret language with which to communicate, and
>that'll annoy nosey people like myself to no end. ;)
>
But this is the case now, isn't it?
>
>BTW, if we do make Latin the official language, then we're going to need
>to coin some words. "email" for instance. And "web-page."
>"Telephone,", "computer" . . . should we form an Academia Latina for
>such things?
>
>--M. Gladius Saevus
>
Salve Saevus
Now, I like this idea of a Academia. How do we set up such a thing?
Does the Senate appoint an arbiter of terminology ;-)
Vale Cincinnatus


Subject:	A bit of list sanity...
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 21:49:06 EDT

Salvete, Omnes,

It looks like a bit of "list fever" has finally begun reach the Nova Roma
list! This has happened, and will continue to happen, to every internet
mailing list ever created. Touchy topics get posted, angry replies get made,
and then personal sniping begins. It's like a dance... and it's got an almost
mathematical quality in that the results are always pretty similar. Eventually
it runs it's course and the list in question returns to normal - leaving
behind bruised feelings, grudges between subscribers, and sometimes even
people quitting a list.

Even knowing that this happens in the best of societies, all these topics have
taken me by surprise! Patricia Cassia, my partner, was hospitalized this week
with blood clots in her leg, which had travelled to her lungs. I was with her
for four days, and just returned to all this. Have people been drinking out of
old Roman lead water pipes in my absence?

If we collectively decide that we don't want the list going "sour" for a
period of time, there's only one known cure. Don't let people get to you by
saying things calculated to make you upset. This Pagan/Christian thing
especially has gotten out of hand... we KNOW there's an underlying ancient
grudge, and we know we're not going to solve it on the list.

For pity's sakes let's find some new topics. Anyone read any new books? Found
new sites?

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 18:48:16 -0700

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucius v--------l@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Saturday, August 15, 1998 6:32 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul

>From: "Lucius" v--------l@--------
>
>
>>>I've been hoping Nova Roma was going to follow the example of the early
>>Republic rather than that of the decadent, bungled, and unsuccessful
>>Roman Empire. Time will tell.
>>
>>L. Sergius Aust.
>>
>Salvete
> I too hope for the same thing.
> Valete Cincinnatus

The, We must destroy Carthage. No decadent Greek influence. type of Roman
Republic?

just kidding.

I hope too

>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
>to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at <a href="http://www.onelist.com" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com</a> and
>select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.
>


Subject:	Re: My Name!!!
From:	"Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 19:06:08 PDT

>Take your time on a name. There's not a wide, historical variety out
>there for female Roman names. {{Check my spellings on these good
>Citizens}} Usually the Praenomen (first name) is your birth order
>(Prima - first, Secunda - second, Tertia - third...). The Gensnomen
>(middle name) would be your Family (modernly, the last name) such as,
>Ullerius a descendant of Uller. The cognomen (third and subsequent
>names) would be some nickname based upon a physical attribute (Dona -
>gifted, Pulchrituda - beautiful...), occupation (Venator - hunter,
>Ambulator - peddler...), location (Germanicus, Africanus, Americus...)

I thought locations indicated those who had won honor fighting *against*
those locations?

What helped me with the cognomen is a friend of mine who said that, when
you translate Latin names literally, they sound like mafia descriptions.
You know, "Bruno the Rat." that sort of thing. Unfortunately,
classical Latin doesn't have a word for "rat" differentiated from
"mouse," or I'd have taken that. ;)

BTW, just as an aside, Ms. Dunn and I are of no relation -- that I know
of. Although probably, we're very distant cousins, particularly if
she's wealthy. *winks*

--M. Gladius Saevus


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	"Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 19:09:52 PDT

>Salve Saevus
> Now, I like this idea of a Academia. How do we set up such a
thing?
>Does the Senate appoint an arbiter of terminology ;-)
> Vale Cincinnatus
>

I understand England is considering such an academy in order to prevent
the "decay" of the Queen's English. France, of course, has had such a
system in place for years, and -- according to my French friends -- it
gleefully creates new words whenever the need arises, distributes those
words to the public, and is just as gleefully ignored by the public who
tend to borrow English words insteads.

Still, I like the idea of Nova Roma coming up with new Latin words to
describe the modernity in which we live.

--M. Gladius Saevus


Subject:	Re: chat rooms
From:	pythia kingan@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:21:36 +0000

Mike Dunn wrote:

> Fro--------Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
>
> Salve everyone, me again!
> What's the name of the chat room?
> I've got to a list and non of them mention NOVA ROMA
> Which one is it?
>
> Thanx
> Nicola

Salve Nic!
Go to the N.R. website and scroll down to the link to the Forum Romanum.
There you will find a link to the chat room.

--
_______________________________________________________________________
the Studio at the Sign Of The Harp:

Beautuful and Unique Jewelry inspired by the Ancient World.
<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/ma/signoftheharp/jewelry.html" target="_top" >http://www.angelfire.com/ma/signoftheharp/jewelry.html</a>
<a href="http://www.signoftheharp.com" target="_top" >http://www.signoftheharp.com</a>


Subject:	Northern Ireland
From:	pythia kingan@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:27:08 +0000

Khaire Ecclesia,

Some of you may know that my husband is from Belfast. You may have heard
the evening news that a terrible bomb was set off in a market street in
the town of Omagh.
My 11 year old daughter is visiting her grandparent, just outside
Belfast.

They were nowhere near the bomb, but off course we are conserned about a
flare up of violence in the Province. We will be flying out there on a
planned visit, on Wednesday.

Please keep my family in your thoughts and prayers. Thank-you.

All the best, Pythia

--
_______________________________________________________________________
the Studio at the Sign Of The Harp:

Beautuful and Unique Jewelry inspired by the Ancient World.
<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/ma/signoftheharp/jewelry.html" target="_top" >http://www.angelfire.com/ma/signoftheharp/jewelry.html</a>
<a href="http://www.signoftheharp.com" target="_top" >http://www.signoftheharp.com</a>


Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:18:20 -0400

C--------us622@-------- wrote:
>

>
> For pity's sakes let's find some new topics. Anyone read any new books? Found
> new sites?
>
Cassius, no one takes these "list disagreements" seriously! It's simply
mental mastu...oh, dear. Can't say that. Mental exercise. Lots of
ex-debaters in here, obviously.

Pagan vs. Christians has been going on as long as the two have existed.
The discussions just get lively, that's all.

For new site info, see Patricia's latest column in The Eagle! (Always
pimping for the newsletter!)
-- Claudia


Subject:	Re: My Name!!!
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:21:06 -0400

Mike Dunn wrote:
>
> Fro--------Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
>
> By the way everyone, my name ISN@T Mike Dunn!
> It's Nicola Dunn.
> My dad's called Mike, and everytime I send an email his name gets sent. It's
> rather confusing I know but I'm trying to rectify the situation.
>
> Nic
>
What a beautiful name! For help with your ROMAN name, see the Nova Roma
website. Lots of useful information.
<a href="http://www.novaroma.org" target="_top" >http://www.novaroma.org</a>

A pleasure to have you with us. Just ignore us...we sometimes get
unruly, but not often.

-- F. Claudia Juliana


Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	Nathan Hicks moman@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:45:10 -0400

Patrick Dunn wrote:
>
>
> A very good point. Of course, it takes more than speaking and writing
> Latin to be a Roman. But still, a good point. Latin should have an
> honored place.
>
> I agree with your assessment of Latin. When trying to read Latin, I
> even *feel* more intelligent. ;)

Yep. Not only does it often fool me, but occasionally it
seems to fool those around me as well. My parents remain
untricked, though, and still refer to me as "Nathan, the
slow one". :)

> But look at it this way: after the Norman invasion of England, French
> became the "official" language of law and business, while "English" (I
> use that term advisedly, since it was mostly Anglo-saxon, and not yet
> what *we* would consider English) was the language of farmers and
> peasants. What did this mean? It meant that yet another gap was set
> between rural folk and the city folk, that of language. Do you know
> why, in English, it's a "pig" while alive, and "pork" when on the table?
> Because "pig" comes from Anglo-Saxon, spoken by the farmers who raised
> the animals, and "pork" comes from French, spoken by the aristocrates
> who ate the pig. Same with "cow"/"beef", "chicken"/"poultry" and so on.

It seems to me that English is alone among the major
languages of world in having survived an invasion by
foreign speakers. Luckily for us, the Normans weren't
numerous enough to properly colonize Britain.

> If we're building a society here, or rebuilding one (and aren't we?)
> then we have to be most careful about those things that *define* a
> society. One of those things is language, arguably the most important
> one. After all, Rustice, if this bill passes, it'll give you and the
> other Latin scholars a secret language with which to communicate, and
> that'll annoy nosey people like myself to no end. ;)

No, so long as Latin is allowed its official dignity,
I'd not mind an informal custom of translating Latin
to English. Besides, you'll master those passives in
a couple of weeks and join us in that smoke-filled
back room of ours.

> Making Latin an honorary official language, while still providing
> translations into other languages for those of us who cannot speak
> Latin, might not be so objectionable. Even if it contained a clause
> that made Latin the sole official language within, say, 50 years? I
> could agree to that.

Hmm... Make it twenty years and you have a deal, Saeve.
I'd like to see it before I'm confined to a wheelchair.
Be aware that these deadlines tend to sneak up on you.
I doubt that we could imagine losing the Panama Canal
when we agreed to turn it over by 1999.

> BTW, if we do make Latin the official language, then we're going to need
> to coin some words. "email" for instance. And "web-page."
> "Telephone,", "computer" . . . should we form an Academia Latina for
> such things?

The geater part of this problem is not creating neologisms
but rather standardizing them. For example, "Computer" has
been rendered into Latin as "Computratrum" and "Ordinatrum"
based on two modern languages' different preferences. Also,
many new words are lengthy, since Latin scholars have no
head for proper slang. Perhaps Nova Roma can one day create
a proper cant for such words?

(Btw, I believe the Vatican Press has a book of neologisms,
called Recentis Latinitatis something.)

Nathan Hicks
Cnaeus Aelius Rusticus


Subject:	Re: contributions
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:38:07 -0400

Lucius wrote:
>

> Salvete Omnes
> Great stuff, makes me wonder what I'll see in the Eagle.... You are
> contributing to the Eagle, aren't you?
> Valete Cincinnatus
>
Speaking of which, Cincinnatus...!
You both should be contributing -- I'd be very glad if you would. We
have quite a lot of fiction this issue, and need more variety.

-- F. Claudia


Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:54:49 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 15 Aug 1998, Ira Adams wrote:

> From: Ira Adams iadams@--------
>
> >Lewinski's toga? (yeah, she wore a toga, I betcha.
> >heh)
> Her behavior certainly suggests she should have been wearing a toga.

No, a dress is much easier to pull up and down as the need arises. She
was prepared.

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

Non scholae sed vitae discimus.

Seneca

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

"Such things have often happened and still happen,
and how can these be signs of the end of the world?"

Julian, Emperor of Rome 361-363 A.D.
Extant 331-363 A.D.


Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	Masterofhistory masterofhistory@--------
Date:	Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:03:26 -0700 (PDT)

Ave Consul,

I speak for all of gens Tullia when I say thank you for that appeal
for the restoration of the "sanity" to this list. I have heard of my
family members leaving their computer for two hours and returning to
find over 50 vacuous messages, often directed to one other citizen
alone. This was a public list and most of these comments are better
suited to private e-mail accounts. I would remind everyone that the
Nova Roma website mentions the preferred uses of this list and the
generally pointless banter we have noticed lately is not one of the
specified uses. We Tullii enjoy a fun time as much as the next Roman,
but please, this is becoming ridiculous.

Respectfully,
Avidius Tullius Qf Callidus, Praedans
Paterfamilias, gens Tullia