Subject:	Just want to see if this works! [NIM]
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:42:37 +0100

Subject:	Hello I'm New!
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:54:12 +0100

Hello everyone,
I'm really new to the website and even newer to this list!
I'm probably going to become a nusiance and ask lots and lots of questions,
but, well, I've gotta learn haven't I?
I haven't got a Roman name yet, I'm still expecting a couple of emails on
that subject!

See ya around1
Nic

Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:54:43 +0100

Err what's the Eagle?
Nic

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucius v--------l@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: 16 August 1998 02:48
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?


>From: "Lucius" v--------l@--------
>
>> 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
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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:	My Name!!!
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:57:37 +0100

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: chat rooms
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:55:51 +0100

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

Subject:	Re: My Name!!!
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 03:14:39 +0100

Salve Patrick,
Yeah I'll be your long distance cousin, as long as YOU'RE very wealthy!
*grin*
About the formal language, I don't know enogh Latin!! HELP!!
Also I didn't know that England had set up a college for teaching the
Queen's English! Hey I live in England, when did this happen?!?
Nicola


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Dunn saevvs@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: 16 August 1998 04:12
Subject: [novaroma] Re: My Name!!!


>From: "Patrick Dunn" saevvs@--------
>
>
>
>>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
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 03:33:25 +0100

Yeah but which version of Latin are we going to use? There are quite a few!
There's the original Latin, the hundreds of different Latins up 'til modern
Latin and then here's normal Latin and church Latin
Nicola


-----Original Message-----
From: Na-------- Hicks moman@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: 16 August 1998 04:35
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Official Languages


&g--------om: Na-------- Hicks moman@-------- >
>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
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: My NEW name!
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 04:34:18 +0100

Salve everyon, It's me formerly known as Nicola.
My new Roman name is: Augustina Iulius Caesaria

Subject:	Re: My NEW name!
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 04:43:06 +0100

Err actually it isn't finalized yet
Sorry.
Augustina. Well I'm keeping that!


-----Original Message-----
Fro--------ike Dunn Mike_Dunn@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: 16 August 1998 05:41
Subject: [novaroma] Re: My NEW name!


>Fro--------Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
>
>Salve everyon, It's me formerly known as Nicola.
>My new Roman name is: Augustina Iulius Caesaria
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 00:52:24 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 01:01:58 EDT, you write:

<< Yo, Vin-NIE. Ya got my vote, ya know what I mean? Make me an offer I can't
refuse. >>


: ).....Talk to Johnny Two-Thumbs! He'll straighten ya out!

--D

Subject:	Re: elvis in dreamland
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 00:53:26 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 01:14:30 EDT, you write:

<< Oddly enough, for more scholarly clarification on this topic, see this
month's EAGLE. Only $5 a year, such a bargain. >>

I paid my subscription!!!!!!!!!!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 00:57:05 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 01:47:44 EDT, you write:

<< 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. >>

Hmmm....I'm starting to see a personal tone taken here. So......did
Christianity bring about the fall of Rome? Well, in my humble opinion...YES!
The rot was further stenched by Constantine's betrayal of the Gods who gave
him a throne to sit on thanks to Diocletian who tried to re-fortify the
authority of the Ancient Ones (one of my heros!)

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 00:57:27 -0400 (EDT)

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

> From: AstUs----------------
>
> Palladius has asked me what rot had already set in to bring about the fall
> of the Western Empire, before Constantine.

No, that wasn't what I asked you. The problems you mention below are well
known (and one could claim some were exacerbated by xtianity). What I
asked was do you think that xtianity had any role at all in the decline
and the rot?

Stop making out Gibbon to be the bogey man who created the thesis that
xtianity helped bring about the fall. That idea has been around since
Zosimus and has not died out with "bad historiography" and is still
current among classicists. The debate is what extent xtianity contributed
to the decline. I, despite your assertion, never said it was the sole
cause but think it a major cause. I do think it uncanny that the city of
Rome fell for the first time in 500 years only 16 years after the Altar of
Victory was removed from the Senate and the Vestals were abolished. Such
facts are hard to debate historically. I understand your dismissal of that
idea, it is like when I dismiss the xtian idea that America is in decline
because we have turned away from God: "yup, whatever...and what about all
the other factors?"

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:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 00:59:46 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 02:11:08 EDT, you write:

<< The whole nation arguing over whether or not Caesar
left a stain on Lewinski's toga? >>

Would that be Monicus Lewinskus?

Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:00:16 -0400 (EDT)

On Sat, 15 Aug 1998, Ira Adams wrote:

> From: Ira Adams iadams@--------
>
> >> 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.
> Ah, but (at least in some periods) the wearing of a toga by a woman was a
> sign of loose morals or of a "professional."

Perhaps we should send a bunch or togas to the white house for the use of
Clinton's staff? Call it a diplomatic gift?

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: A bit of list sanity...
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:00:16 -0400

>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?


Ave et Salvete
I am dismayed to hear this about Patricia. I hope that she is on
the mend and will be discharged soon. My thoughts and prayers are with her
for a speedy recovery.
Valete Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus

Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 06:03:34 +0100

LOL.
Augustina
PS if you're around now why don't you get on the chat site?

-----Original Message-----
From: Dexippus@-------- Dexippus@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: 16 August 1998 07:06
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul


>From: Dexippus@--------
>
>In a message dated 98-08-15 02:11:08 EDT, you write:
>
><< The whole nation arguing over whether or not Caesar
> left a stain on Lewinski's toga? >>
>
>Would that be Monicus Lewinskus?
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 06:05:09 +0100

Maybe she wore a mini-toga!
Augustus

-----Original Message-----
From: D. Iunius Palladius amcgrath@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: 16 August 1998 07:06
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul


>From: "D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
>
>
>On Sat, 15 Aug 1998, Ira Adams wrote:
>
>> From: Ira Adams iadams@--------
>>
>> >> 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.
>> Ah, but (at least in some periods) the wearing of a toga by a woman was a
>> sign of loose morals or of a "professional."
>
>Perhaps we should send a bunch or togas to the white house for the use of
>Clinton's staff? Call it a diplomatic gift?
>
>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.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Shaker like??
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:08:11 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 11:35:53 EDT, you write:

<< Minneapolis has NO housing and I am ready to blow
this pop stand. Just tell me where to be and I'm there :-). >>

Come to Jersey! Lots of us here! Just don't drink the water!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: Dreamland {cont} and Paul
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:09:32 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 12:12:28 EDT, you write:

<< Her behavior certainly suggests she should have been wearing a toga.
>>

Her behavior suggests she should have been wearing a diaper!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: a bit of list sanity. Sorr <hanging head in shame> NIM
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 06:13:49 +0100

Subject:	Re: Rome and the Eastern Empire
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:30:00 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 12:39:06 EDT, you write:

<< After I read the notes this morning, I went to the periodontist to get my
gum
problems evaluated >>

OK...too much information there!

First, I think I got the gist of what you were trying to say about Hispanic
Americans and Asian Americans but I would like to point out for clarification
(of what I think you may agree) is that everyone is an individual and that not
all Hispanics living in the U.S. are only here for economic reasons and do not
want to set up roots or vice versa with Asian Americans or any other national
identified American.

Second, while you make some good points for the Eastern citizens being Roman,
I can't see how you can call them citizens of Rome after Rome ceased to be the
capital of the Empire. Let's say for example that Florida grew to become a
vast empire in the South East US...encompassing Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia,
Arkansas, Texas and South Carolina into a vast economical and political block.
Let us say, for argument's sake, that the capital of this "empire" was
Jacksonville (which is in Florida for those who are not living in the US) and
the people who lived throughout (whether Florida proper or not) called
themselves Citizens of the Floridian Federation.

Now let's say a few centuries pass by and due to economic and political
struggles, the Floridian Federation decides to move it's capital to Boca Raton
(still in Florida). It is still the Floridian Federation since the capital is
in Florida proper. Now...let's say another hundred years pass and further
troubles force the Federation to move the Capital to Fort Worth in
Texas....while the structure of the empire and it's citizen's status may
remain the same, it is no longer Floridian...but Texan. They may choose to
keep the name "Floridian" but in essence, the seat of power is in Texas...NOT
Florida!

This is my view. If you don't agree with it and believe that these mythical
citizens are still Floridian, then fine. You can believe what you want, but
you won't convince me otherwise.

--Dexippus
<<Viva Florida!>>

Subject:	Re: Hey Dexippus!
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 06:32:00 +0100

Come on get on the chat forum
Augustina!

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:54:33 EDT

In a message dated 8/15/98 5:42:00 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
saevvs@-------- writes:

<< But I don't think knocking on doors saying, "Have you heard the word of
Apollo today?" is going to do much good. >>

But that is not what Paul and his fellow missionaries did. They followed the
usual and accepted practice of spreading a new idea; they went to the open
markets, agora, and forums.

Festus

Subject:	Re: Official Languages
From:	Greg Rothenberger gregor59@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:00:25 -0700

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.
>
> 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

All right, I'm going to just jump in here. Speaking as one who is not yet a
citizen
(although I hope to be accepted soon), I am in favor of Latin as an official
language.
Please note, I do not yet speak, read or write Latin. Yet. I must say,
though, that
I don't really like the idea of Latin as the only official language. I tend
to think
something along the lines of the Canadian model (with two official
languages) is
the best option.

As for an Academia Latina, if there is not yet one in the world of academe,
there
should be. Is this a service Nova Roma might be able to help provide?

If I have missed some of the subtleties in this discussion, I apologize.
I've only
been following this list for a few days. However, I must say that the
entire
concept of Nova Roma is one that I have felt very strongly about since I
came
across it. In fact, I could easily say I have felt very much in favor of
such a
concept since well before I ever found Nova Roma. I'm looking forward to
doing whatever I can to help it's advance.

Thanks for listening.

Greg
Louisville, Kentucky (USA)
gregor59@--------

Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:57:06 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 13:25:50 EDT, you write:

<< 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 of all, let's make one thing perfectly clear here...and I can only speak
for myself...I am not claiming that the fall of Rome began with Constantine's
conversion or the ascendancy of Christianity. No intelligent person can
ignore the mundane causes for why Rome ceased to be an Empire. The lists of
"rot" you have given did contribute to Rome's collapse.

However, my point is from a mere spiritual perspective. It was in the city of
Rome that the first settlers of the city declared obedience to the Roman gods
and contracted to giving offerings in return for their continued support,
safe-guarding, and blessings of Rome and its territories. It was in the city
of Rome that the Altar of Victory was established and the Vestals held their
rites for the advancement of the Republic and Empire. It was in Rome that the
Genius of the Ceasars resided to whom citizens offered sacrifice and prayer.

It is of my opinion that if Rome and its citizens had not abandoned the
Deities for whom they offered sacrifice and worship in return for national
blessings, then the Gods would have seen them through the socio-economic
troubles they were facing at the time. But the conversion of Constantine and
the establishment of Xtianity as the only State Religion with the abolishment
of the daily pagan sacrifices and prayers and the dispelling of the Vestals
from the temples was the last and final straw for the Roman gods who then
turned their back, ritefully so, on those to whom they blessed so richly.

At that time, whatever happend to Rome as a city or an Empire was not with the
blessings of the Pagan Gods. The "Empire" may have continued on with its
capital in Constantinople, but it wasn't in the hands of the Romans or under
their control. It could be that this was the intention of the Pagan Gods.
"Fine...abandon us? May all that you have worked for and gained be now in the
hands of foreigners in a distant land. Rome shall no longer hold the seat of
power"

If you wish to believe that the xtian god was then safeguarding the
Empire...fine, be my guest. If you wish to believe that spirituality had
nothing to do with any of this...fine, go right ahead. If you wish to believe
that the Pagan gods did not abandon Rome and continued to oversee the Empire
while it existed in Byzantium...ok, go with that thought.

But, as I said in another post, you will not convince me otherwise.
Constantine and the Roman xtians did not save the empire...they delivered it
into the hands of non-Romans who then blasphemed the name instead of calling
it anew.

There...I've said it and I'll stand by it. And to this I leave the argument
(well, we'll see!)

: )

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:57:24 EDT

In a message dated 8/15/98 6:25:18 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
m--------oon@-------- wr--------:

<< 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. >>

Claudia love, Paul and his colleagues "forced" no one.

Festus

Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	Greg Rothenberger gregor59@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:10:06 -0700

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

> 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?
>

Sorry to hear it. I hope everything's improving. Let us know how it goes.

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

I've read a few that are new to me, although probably not to anyone else
here.Yesterday I finished "Arms of Nemesis" by Steven Saylor, and today I
started
"Catilina's Riddle" by the same. Two more (including the new "House of the
Vestals"), and I'll have read the entire series. Which, by the way, I think is
great.

Greg
Louisville, Kentucky (USA)
gregor59@--------

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:07:40 EDT

In a message dated 8/15/98 6:25:18 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
m--------oon@-------- wr--------:

<< 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. >>

Claudia, why is saying, "you are wrong" so horrid? Aristotean that I am, I
accept the view that things are as they are, independent of human thought,
wish, or perception. If there is one god, then polytheism is wrong, period.
I do not and will never subscribe to the new agey, politically correct idea
that "all religions are true". Maybe none of them are, but if one religion is
true, then religions with opposing beliefs are wrong.

If you are so sure yours IS true, then it should not matter to you if others
say it is not true. I had a hare Krishna tell me once that I was
reincarnated,m and would be again. Did this bother me? No. I am certain
that he is wrong, and so I do not worry or care that he disagrees.

I have said and do say that certain religious views are wrong. For instance,
I say materialism is inadequet and wrong. And I say "pantheism" is just
atheism dressed in religioius language for cowards who are afraid to face the
existential consequences of materialism, which is nihilism.

20th century westerners need to thicken their skins. There is no inalienable
human right to not be told, "you are wrong". We all have to hear it at least
a million times.

Festus

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:08:43 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 17:50:15 EDT, you write:

<< 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. >>


I'm glad someone else answered to this as I am now up at 2:00am trying to get
through 85 e-mails and am working my last Gay-nerve answering such impotence
and disparcher.

I for one took some offense to Festus' posts and indications that
practitioners of pagan faiths feel their spirituality unworthy of
proselytizing. Excuse me for allowing freedom of thought and belief!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:11:47 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-15 18:42:01 EDT, you write:

<< 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. >>


I'm with you Saevus! As a fellow Apollonian, I share your dream!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:15:23 EDT

Palladius,

The facts that almost immediately after the Supreme Court declared prayer
and Bible reading in the public schools unconsitutional school performance and
disrutpion began to increase are hard to debate too.

What IS debateable in the above is the interpretation that the two are
LINKED, that the one caused the other.

The Western Empire was a lost cause before the statue was removed and the
vestals kicked out. It did not have the manpower and resources to turn the
tide back. And the other undebateable fact is that the once pagan Eastern
Empire SURVIVED the neglect of those same pagan gods.

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:31:41 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 02:08:05 EDT, you write:

<< 20th century westerners need to thicken their skins. There is no
inalienable
human right to not be told, "you are wrong". We all have to hear it at least
a million times. >>


Fine...YOU ARE WRONG!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:32:55 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 16 Aug 1998 AstUs---------------- wrote:

> From: AstUs----------------
>
> In a message dated 8/15/98 6:25:18 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
> m--------oon@-------- wr--------:
>
> << 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. >>
>
> Claudia love, Paul and his colleagues "forced" no one.

Paul and his "colleagues" may not have but their descendants from the time
of Constantine on did, especially Theodosius who forbade pagan worship on
pain of death (and greatly reinforced in the 6th century by the Byzantine
Emperor, Justinian, while we're on the Eastern empire) . I've always
thought it ironic that crucifixtion was a common form of punishment for
those pagans who would not convert. I suppose that the xtians behind such
punishments thought that a fitting irony.

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: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:44:44 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 16 Aug 1998 AstUs---------------- wrote:

> From: AstUs----------------
>
> In a message dated 8/15/98 6:25:18 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
> m--------oon@-------- wr--------:
>
> << 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. >>
>
> Claudia, why is saying, "you are wrong" so horrid? Aristotean that I am, I
> accept the view that things are as they are, independent of human thought,
> wish, or perception. If there is one god, then polytheism is wrong, period.
> I do not and will never subscribe to the new agey, politically correct idea
> that "all religions are true". Maybe none of them are, but if one religion is
> true, then religions with opposing beliefs are wrong.

Why?? No offence but this makes no sense at all. Most religions are not in
contradiction nor try to be. Maybe you're right, maybe they're all wrong,
maybe none, maybe one is. Perhaps they all are "right" since "God" is
infinite and has infinite manifestations. There is no objective way for
one person to prove this to another, however, since it cannot be "proved"
objectively unless some God appears and tells you the truth. Even then
though, how would you know that is the only God with the only truth?

Throw a holy book at someone, someone throws another. Sticks and stones...

> 20th century westerners need to thicken their skins. There is no inalienable
> human right to not be told, "you are wrong". We all have to hear it at least
> a million times.

Well, Feste, you are wrong. Logic can only take you so far in explaining
religion. There is a metaphysical barrier it cannot cross. You do not know
the truth so you cannot say which religion, if any of them, is wrong.


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: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	"D. Iunius Palladius" amcgrath@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 02:51:27 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 16 Aug 1998 AstUs---------------- wrote:

> From: AstUs----------------
>
> Palladius,
>
> The facts that almost immediately after the Supreme Court declared prayer
> and Bible reading in the public schools unconsitutional school performance and
> disrutpion began to increase are hard to debate too.
>
> What IS debateable in the above is the interpretation that the two are
> LINKED, that the one caused the other.
>
> The Western Empire was a lost cause before the statue was removed and the
> vestals kicked out. It did not have the manpower and resources to turn the
> tide back. And the other undebateable fact is that the once pagan Eastern
> Empire SURVIVED the neglect of those same pagan gods.


And why is that? Did they make a covenant with a new God (since the East
abandoned Paganism much more quickly than the West) or are there religious
factors at all? You are never quite clear on your position there. Did
religion play a role in the fall of the west or survival of the East?


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: Byzantines
From:	Oplontian@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 03:28:14 EDT

Salvete,
The word "Byzantine" has been used by western historians as a derogatory term
to describe the later history of the Roman Empire. It should be pointed out
that the people who lived in the so called "Byzantine Empire" never used that
name. They called their empire the "Roman Empire" and they called themselves
"Romans" until the final conquest of the Empire by the Turks in 1453. They
called their capital city "Constantinople" or "New Rome", never "Byzantium".
In fact, the direct cultural descendants of the Roman Empire, the modern
Greeks, continued to call themselves "Romans" until the early 1800's, when the
modern country of Greece was created. Rome was a city that became an empire.
One of its greatest achievements was the eventual extension of citizenship to
almost all of the varied peoples who lived within its borders. People who
lived in the Greek speaking eastern half of the empire were just as much Roman
as anyone who lived in the Latin speaking west. The Roman Empire did not
become less Roman because one day it lost its original capital city. There is
an unbroken line of imperial rulers from Julius Caesar down to Constantine XI
Palaiologos. This is a period of 1,500 years. The fact that the Roman Empire
was a Christian empire longer than it was a Pagan empire may be distasteful to
modern Roman Pagans, but it is still a fact. Personally, I feel that the
conversion of the Empire to Christianity was one of the most dreadful and
terrible things that could have happened to human society. I could use
stronger words here, but I'm trying to be polite. Even so, to casually
dismiss later Roman history as merely "Byzantine" is inappropriate. The later
Roman Empire is worthy of study, although it is certainly beyond Nova Roma's
area of interest.
I have seen some comments by Nova Romans about how awful the Roman Empire was,
and how wonderful the Roman Republic was. It seems to me that the greatest
achievement of the Republic was the creation of the Empire, and the
transformation of a grubby little town into a great imperial capital, the
memory of which still haunts the world. If Rome had remained a small
Republican city state it would not be remembered today, and there would be no
Nova Roma.
Valete,
Quintus Poppaeus Sabinus

Subject:	Re: What Time EST do people get online and start communicating? <NIM>
From:	"Mike Dunn" Mike_Dunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 12:34:47 +0100

Subject:	Re: Byzantines
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 08:15:12 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 03:28:43 EDT, Oplontian writes:

<< Salvete,
The word "Byzantine" has been used by western historians as a derogatory term
to describe the later history of the Roman Empire. It should be pointed out
that the people who lived in the so called "Byzantine Empire" never used that
name. They called their empire the "Roman Empire" and they called themselves
"Romans" until the final conquest of the Empire by the Turks in 1453. They
called their capital city "Constantinople" or "New Rome", never "Byzantium".
In fact, the direct cultural descendants of the Roman Empire, the modern
Greeks, continued to call themselves "Romans" until the early 1800's, when
the
modern country of Greece was created.

Actually, this is fairly well understood. We've been using the term
"Byzantine" as a modern convenience, to separate the older pagan Western
empire from the later predominantly Christian Eastern empire. There's no
question that the East considered itself Roman through most of history.

>Rome was a city that became an empire.
One of its greatest achievements was the eventual extension of citizenship to
almost all of the varied peoples who lived within its borders. People who
lived in the Greek speaking eastern half of the empire were just as much
Roman
as anyone who lived in the Latin speaking west.

That's true, and Nova Roma has been doing it's best to be as inclusive.
Classical Roman culture became a standard of cooperation which has never since
been equalled.

> The Roman Empire did not
become less Roman because one day it lost its original capital city. There
is
an unbroken line of imperial rulers from Julius Caesar down to Constantine XI
Palaiologos. This is a period of 1,500 years. The fact that the Roman Empire
was a Christian empire longer than it was a Pagan empire may be distasteful
to
modern Roman Pagans, but it is still a fact.

It really depends on perspective. Yes, there was a succession of rulers, and
yes, there was a tendency to keep "Roman" trappings in Eastern society where
possible. That doesn't mean that the civilization had not changed! Eastern
Roman civilization was fundamentally different than the earlier Empire had
been.

As a rough example, if the US continued an unbroken succession of
presidential elections, would America still be the same nation if it began to
be run from the territory Russia now occupies, Buddhism or Scientology became
the religion followed by 95% of the populace, and other sweeping changes took
place? It would be "American" in many ways, but it certainly wouldn't be
exactly the same.

> Personally, I feel that the
conversion of the Empire to Christianity was one of the most dreadful and
terrible things that could have happened to human society. I could use
stronger words here, but I'm trying to be polite. Even so, to casually
dismiss later Roman history as merely "Byzantine" is inappropriate. The
later
Roman Empire is worthy of study, although it is certainly beyond Nova Roma's
area of interest.

I don't know about other folks, but my favorite emperor, Julian, was a
Byzantine! Nobody is "dismissing" later Eastern culture. There simply has to
be some way to define important differences in debate, and this is the most
accurate and easily understood method. I personally find the Eastern Empire to
be a perfect example of the importance of Classical Roman civilization. Even
when the people had abandoned much of it's foundation, it was still powerful
enough to survive many centuries.

> I have seen some comments by Nova Romans about how awful the Roman Empire
was, and how wonderful the Roman Republic was. It seems to me that the
greatest
achievement of the Republic was the creation of the Empire, and the
transformation of a grubby little town into a great imperial capital, the
memory of which still haunts the world. If Rome had remained a small
Republican city state it would not be remembered today, and there would be no
Nova Roma.

Absolutely! Once again... the goal of Nova Roma is to work with the best
possible aspects of all eras of Classical Roman history. This by nature
includes the Republic, and also the Western and Eastern empires. If it seems
that a lot of focus is being put into the Republican era, it's simply because
we've used the Republic as a model for government and public religious forms.
As you've said, this was the era that manifested some of the greatest drive
and vision in Roman history!

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul


Valete,
Quintus Poppaeus Sabinus

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 08:45:05 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 02:08:07 EDT, Festus writes:

<<
Claudia, why is saying, "you are wrong" so horrid? Aristotean that I am, I
accept the view that things are as they are, independent of human thought,
wish, or perception. If there is one god, then polytheism is wrong, period.
I do not and will never subscribe to the new agey, politically correct idea
that "all religions are true". Maybe none of them are, but if one religion
is
true, then religions with opposing beliefs are wrong.

I've always thought it was interesting that Monotheists happily believe that
God created the universe, Angels, Demons, spirits, humans, animals, etc... but
couldn't possibly create other gods, or perhaps manifest itself as Jupiter in
Rome, and Zeus in Greece, or any/all of the other deities.

The difficulty here is that Polytheism doesn't necessarily define everything
in "Either/Or" situations. It's an infinite universe, and there are many ways
to view it.

For instance, much of Classical polytheism DOES believe that there is only one
god. They simply see this ultimate universal mind/force manifesting in many
different ways, i.e. as different deities within different lands. Polytheism
happily accepts the existance of Jehovah/Yahweh... it's Monotheism that
doesn't accept us. We won't tell you you're wrong, because we usually believe
that you're right TOO.

Because of this, your harping on your rightness and our wrongness is tending
to rub a lot of people the wrong way. You seem to be upholding a rational
point of debate less, and deliberately trying to upset people more.

> If you are so sure yours IS true, then it should not matter to you if others
say it is not true. I had a hare Krishna tell me once that I was
reincarnated,m and would be again. Did this bother me? No. I am certain
that he is wrong, and so I do not worry or care that he disagrees.

So all this disagreement must be brought out here, rather than focus on Roman
subjects?

> I have said and do say that certain religious views are wrong. For
instance,
I say materialism is inadequet and wrong. And I say "pantheism" is just
atheism dressed in religioius language for cowards who are afraid to face the
existential consequences of materialism, which is nihilism.

Thank you for sharing your personal opinion.

> 20th century westerners need to thicken their skins. There is no
inalienable
human right to not be told, "you are wrong". We all have to hear it at least
a million times.

Perhaps, but shouting it in public forums and causing a lot of infighting may
not be the best way to do this.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 08:47:51 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 02:05:34 EDT, greg writes:

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

> I've read a few that are new to me, although probably not to anyone else
here.Yesterday I finished "Arms of Nemesis" by Steven Saylor, and today I
started
"Catilina's Riddle" by the same. Two more (including the new "House of the
Vestals"), and I'll have read the entire series. Which, by the way, I think
is
great. >>

That was a fun series! Have you read the books by Colleen McCullough?

Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 08:59:06 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 02:15:44 EDT, you write:

<< The Western Empire was a lost cause before the statue was removed and the
vestals kicked out. It did not have the manpower and resources to turn the
tide back. And the other undebateable fact is that the once pagan Eastern
Empire SURVIVED the neglect of those same pagan gods.
>>

I can't help laughing as the song goes through my head...

"It's Istanbul, not Constantinople..." :)

Thank the gods, I've finally found some humor in this blasted thread!!!

Vale,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	Greg Rothenberger gregor59@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 09:29:37 -0700

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

> That was a fun series! Have you read the books by Colleen McCullough?

No, I haven't. I'll have to look for them when I go to work today.
I work in a bookstore, so it makes it that much easier for me to
spend all my money on books. But, such is life.

Greg
Louisville, Kentucky (USA)
gregor59@--------

Subject:	Re: This Dreamland and Paul thing...
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 09:50:56 EDT

Salve,

Oh drat. I've missed this particular message in the recent flood of posts.
This is helpful stuff, so I'll happily answer it belatedly...

In a message dated 98-08-15 14:04:39 EDT, Festus writes:

<< 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!

Lol! Actually, the Citizens on this list have proven themselves to be a pretty
clear-headed lot, when discussions are on a friendly and factual basis rather
than an emotional and spiritual one.

Up till this recent series of list threads, Nova Roma has done a wonderful job
of harmonizing various ancient interests into a concern that everyone can
share in. Not a bad accomplishment since we're still in our first year!

> 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}.

Glad to hear this! It'd be interesting to hear of your historical interests.
How long have you been interested in Rome? I can only assume your focus is on
the later Eastern empire?

> 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 must say that the practical concerns you were calling attention to were
confusing topics at the time. The first post I saw from you was about Nova
Roma as an "island nation"... an idea that doesn't exist anywhere in any of
our material. It might have been easier to simply ask for clarification on
some issues!

> 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.

As far as I can recall, the situation was raised by the religious content of
some of your postings. I personally consider the Christian/Pagan debate a non-
issue... the policies of Nova Roma have been clearly set on the website.
There's a clear division between public and private religion. We've hoped to
concentrate on sharing what historical issues we can, rather than debate
personal belief.

> 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.

I'm simply not going to get into this. Religious proselytism is not the point
of this list: in fact it's extremely off topic. These religious issues are
best dealt with in private Emails, if they must be covered at all.

Vale,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Consul

Subject:	A couple of Latin sites
From:	Greg Rothenberger gregor59@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 10:51:37 -0700

Here's a couple of Latin sites I found today. The first is an
introductory online Latin course
at a site called (I think) "Latin & Ancient Rome."
<a href="http://mmm.mbhs.edu/~ebaker/latin" target="_top" >http://mmm.mbhs.edu/~ebaker/latin</a>

The second is the site for the North American Institute for Living Latin
Studies. This
is a group that favors the use of Latin as a living, modern language.
Somewhat
academic in orientation, but very interesting.
<a href="http://www.latin.org" target="_top" >http://www.latin.org</a>

Greg
Louisville, Kentucky (USA)
gregor59@--------

Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	Megas-Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 09:48:39 -0700

Salus et Fortuna Greg, Salve,

I am currently re-reading the M. Didus Falco novels by Lindsay Davies.
After you finish with Gordianus, you may want to give these others a
read. They're set in the time of Vespasian and are a bit "lighter" than
the Saylor novels.

May All the Holy Ones continue Blessings for Thee and Thine,

S. Ullerius Venator
Citizen and Paterfamilias

aka

Sven Ullrsson
Catamount Grange Kindred

Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 11:22:55 -0400

>> That was a fun series! Have you read the books by Colleen McCullough?
>
These too are Great books!

>No, I haven't. I'll have to look for them when I go to work today.
>I work in a bookstore, so it makes it that much easier for me to
>spend all my money on books. But, such is life.
>Greg

You lucky "dog" ;-) Lucius Equitius

Subject:	Re: A bit of list sanity...
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 11:31:44 -0400

>
>Sorry to hear it. I hope everything's improving. Let us know how it goes.
>
>> For pity's sakes let's find some new topics. Anyone read any new books? Found
>> new sites?
>>
>I've read a few that are new to me, although probably not to anyone else
>here.Yesterday I finished "Arms of Nemesis" by Steven Saylor, and today I
>started
>"Catilina's Riddle" by the same. Two more (including the new "House of the
>Vestals"), and I'll have read the entire series. Which, by the way, I think is
>great.
>Greg

Savete et Ave Greg
I suggest that when you finish reading Saylor's series. Go directly to
Lindsey Davis' "Falco" series set durring the Flavian dynasty c.70 AD. Of course
Colleen McCullough is Very good as well. I think you will enjoy these for
different reasons. I have finished both series, including the Davis books that I
had to order from Britian because they aren't yet available in the US. If anyone
is interested check out <a href="http://www.bookshop.co.uk" target="_top" >http://www.bookshop.co.uk</a> for Three Hands in the
Fountian, Two for the Lions (Falco) and Course of Honor which is not part of the
Falco series but is set durring the same time. They were very helpful and
prompt.

Valete Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus

Subject:	Re: A couple of Latin sites
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 11:44:20 -0400

>Here's a couple of Latin sites I found today. The first is an
>introductory online Latin course
>at a site called (I think) "Latin & Ancient Rome."
> <a href="http://mmm.mbhs.edu/~ebaker/latin" target="_top" >http://mmm.mbhs.edu/~ebaker/latin</a>
>
>The second is the site for the North American Institute for Living Latin
>Studies. This
>is a group that favors the use of Latin as a living, modern language.
>Somewhat
>academic in orientation, but very interesting.
> <a href="http://www.latin.org" target="_top" >http://www.latin.org</a>
>
>Greg


Ave et Salvete
Mille Gratii tibi ago, Greg{ get a Roman name ;>) } This is a great
example of the use of the mail list, sharingf resouces and information. I
had one site bookmarked before our hard drive crashed but the other one I
have not seen yet. BTW have you sent in your citizenship application yet
;-).
Valete Cinicnnatus

Subject:	Re: Rome's fall: Christianity to blame?
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 12:37:05 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 08:59:33 EDT, you write:

<< I can't help laughing as the song goes through my head...

"It's Istanbul, not Constantinople..." :)
>>

I too can't get this song out of my head. Thanks for showing me others are
familiar with it!

--Dexippus

Subject:	Re: Byzantines
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 10:44:17 -0700

-----Original Message-----
From: C--------us622@-------- C--------us622@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Sunday, August 16, 1998 5:15 AM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Byzantines


>From: C--------us622@--------
>
>In a message dated 98-08-16 03:28:43 EDT, Oplontian writes:
>
><< Salvete,
> The word "Byzantine" has been used by western historians as a derogatory
term
> to describe the later history of the Roman Empire. It should be pointed
out
> that the people who lived in the so called "Byzantine Empire" never used
that
> name. They called their empire the "Roman Empire" and they called
themselves
> "Romans" until the final conquest of the Empire by the Turks in 1453.
They
> called their capital city "Constantinople" or "New Rome", never
"Byzantium".
> In fact, the direct cultural descendants of the Roman Empire, the modern
> Greeks, continued to call themselves "Romans" until the early 1800's, when
>the
> modern country of Greece was created.
>
>Actually, this is fairly well understood. We've been using the term
>"Byzantine" as a modern convenience, to separate the older pagan Western
>empire from the later predominantly Christian Eastern empire. There's no
>question that the East considered itself Roman through most of history.
>
>>Rome was a city that became an empire.
> One of its greatest achievements was the eventual extension of citizenship
to
> almost all of the varied peoples who lived within its borders. People who
> lived in the Greek speaking eastern half of the empire were just as much
>Roman
> as anyone who lived in the Latin speaking west.
>
>That's true, and Nova Roma has been doing it's best to be as inclusive.
>Classical Roman culture became a standard of cooperation which has never
since
>been equalled.
>
>> The Roman Empire did not
> become less Roman because one day it lost its original capital city.
There
>is
> an unbroken line of imperial rulers from Julius Caesar down to Constantine
XI
> Palaiologos. This is a period of 1,500 years. The fact that the Roman
Empire
> was a Christian empire longer than it was a Pagan empire may be
distasteful
>to
> modern Roman Pagans, but it is still a fact.
>
>It really depends on perspective. Yes, there was a succession of rulers,
and
>yes, there was a tendency to keep "Roman" trappings in Eastern society
where
>possible. That doesn't mean that the civilization had not changed! Eastern
>Roman civilization was fundamentally different than the earlier Empire had
>been.


Thats not entirely a correct assessment. Remember, Their official language
was Still Latin until the 7th Century CE. It was after the lost most of
their territories to the Muslims that that had changed. And Anotolia and
the Balkans were their main sources of land that Greek became the
predominate language. The customs of the Empire, were very oriental, just
like the customs of the Late Roman Empire.

> As a rough example, if the US continued an unbroken succession of
>presidential elections, would America still be the same nation if it began
to
>be run from the territory Russia now occupies, Buddhism or Scientology
became
>the religion followed by 95% of the populace, and other sweeping changes
took
>place? It would be "American" in many ways, but it certainly wouldn't be
>exactly the same.
>
>> Personally, I feel that the
> conversion of the Empire to Christianity was one of the most dreadful and
> terrible things that could have happened to human society. I could use
> stronger words here, but I'm trying to be polite. Even so, to casually
> dismiss later Roman history as merely "Byzantine" is inappropriate. The
>later
> Roman Empire is worthy of study, although it is certainly beyond Nova
Roma's
> area of interest.
>
>I don't know about other folks, but my favorite emperor, Julian, was a
>Byzantine! Nobody is "dismissing" later Eastern culture. There simply has
to
>be some way to define important differences in debate, and this is the most
>accurate and easily understood method. I personally find the Eastern Empire
to
>be a perfect example of the importance of Classical Roman civilization.
Even
>when the people had abandoned much of it's foundation, it was still
powerful
>enough to survive many centuries.
>
>> I have seen some comments by Nova Romans about how awful the Roman Empire
>was, and how wonderful the Roman Republic was. It seems to me that the
>greatest
> achievement of the Republic was the creation of the Empire, and the
> transformation of a grubby little town into a great imperial capital, the
> memory of which still haunts the world. If Rome had remained a small
> Republican city state it would not be remembered today, and there would be
no
> Nova Roma.
>
>Absolutely! Once again... the goal of Nova Roma is to work with the best
>possible aspects of all eras of Classical Roman history. This by nature
>includes the Republic, and also the Western and Eastern empires. If it
seems
>that a lot of focus is being put into the Republican era, it's simply
because
>we've used the Republic as a model for government and public religious
forms.
>As you've said, this was the era that manifested some of the greatest drive
>and vision in Roman history!
>
>Valete,
>
>Marcus Cassius Julianus
>Consul
>
>
> Valete,
> Quintus Poppaeus Sabinus
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: McCullough
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 14:15:10 -0400

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

>
> That was a fun series! Have you read the books by Colleen McCullough?
>
And if you haven't, rest assured that the esteemed Consul will make sure
that you DO! And you'll be very grateful. Before he and Pat introduced
me to the Masters of Rome series, all I had read was the murky and kind
of soppy Thorn Birds.

But take it as you find it: McCullough is obstinate on the fact that
Gaius Julius was *never* involved with guys. It was all a
misunderstanding and/or vicious Senate gossip, she says.

Dex, any counterarguments?

-- Claudia

Subject:	Re: Davis & Saylor
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 14:24:05 -0400

Lucius wrote:
>
>
> I suggest that when you finish reading Saylor's series. Go
> directly to Lindsey Davis' "Falco" series set durring the Flavian
> dynasty c.70 AD. Of course Colleen McCullough is Very good as well. I
> think you will enjoy these for different reasons. I have finished both
> series, including the Davis books that I had to order from Britian
> because they aren't yet available in the US. If anyone is interested
> check out <a href="http://www.bookshop.co.uk" target="_top" >http://www.bookshop.co.uk</a> for Three Hands in the
> Fountian, Two for the Lions (Falco) and Course of Honor which is not
> part of the Falco series but is set durring the same time. They were
> very helpful and prompt.
>
> Valete Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus

Thank you for this, Cincinnatus. I'd heard of the new Davis books but
haven't been able to find them, and I'm a rabid Falco fanatic. I find
that her approach to everyday living in Rome is convincing, and often
funny, and Falco's relationship with Vespasian and Titus is about the
same as we all have with our employers.

I like the Saylor books, but if you know history at all, it's fairly
easy to figure out what's going to happen in the main subplot. However,
his habit of building personal mysteries around real events is
interesting. And his style of aging his characters and adding new
generations is fairly unique among mystery writers.

Subject:	Re: McCullough
From:	Ricci razenna@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 11:51:40 -0700

m--------oon@-------- wrote:>
> But take it as you find it: McCullough is obstinate on the fact that
> Gaius Julius was *never* involved with guys. It was all a
> misunderstanding and/or vicious Senate gossip, she says.
>
> Dex, any counterarguments?
>
> -- Claudia

I'm definitely not Dex, but... my view is that "Me thinks the lady doth
protest too much."

I've really got to work on that vaporware article.

Vale,
Ericius

Subject:	Re: Davis & Saylor
From:	Ricci razenna@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 12:07:51 -0700

Salvete!
I've read some of both series, by far more of the Davis books than the
Saylor ones, and I've enjoyed them both quite a bit. I also have
problems with both. Saylor gets sloppy with some of his details. No,
I'm not going to get into them, it doesn't matter to most people, I'm
talking about my impressions. Aside from this there is something that
makes me feel, and I mean "feel", that Falco is more true to his period
than Gordianus is to his--something of attitude, the smell of the
culture. Yet I have an easier time being with Gordianus. Falco makes
*me* want to strangle him, hit him upside the head, etc. I've had
roomates like Falco. And while I do believe he knows how lucky he is to
have Helena love him, but...grrrr!!!! I find him so aggravating that I
have trouble picking up the next book. Just like I have trouble calling
up ex-roomie Bob to see if *he8 has gotten his life together yet. Does
this mean I like Davis's writing? You beter believe it!

Vale,
Ericius.

Subject:	Re: Davis & Saylor
From:	missmoon@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 19:52:24 -0400

Ricci wrote:
>
>
> culture. Yet I have an easier time being with Gordianus. Falco makes
> *me* want to strangle him, hit him upside the head, etc. I've had
> roomates like Falco. And while I do believe he knows how lucky he is to
> have Helena love him, but...grrrr!!!! I find him so aggravating that I
> have trouble picking up the next book. Just like I have trouble calling
> up ex-roomie Bob to see if *he8 has gotten his life together yet. Does
> this mean I like Davis's writing? You beter believe it!
>
>
I know what you mean about Falco, although I just love that character.
Now, if he really wanted to piss off the middle rank, as he's said, he
would have insisted on holding Vespasian to his promise. Falco in the
middle class would be just too funny! And what's this deal about not
accepting Helena's money? That doesn't strike me as very Roman. Roman
marriage was pretty much about dowries and social standing. Love was
nice, but not necessary. People familiar with Roman culture would know
this, but I guess the average reader wouldn't. I think Davis just wants
to avoid Falco's looking like a gigolo.

Falco as a father promises much hilarity!

-- F. Claudia

Subject:	Re: McCullough
From:	Dexippus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 21:56:51 EDT

In a message dated 98-08-16 14:18:10 EDT, you write:

<< But take it as you find it: McCullough is obstinate on the fact that
Gaius Julius was *never* involved with guys. It was all a
misunderstanding and/or vicious Senate gossip, she says.

Dex, any counterarguments? >>

I am not familiar with McCullough or her writings. But I would declare that
Gaius Julius was very much involved with men of his choosing. Oh the days of
Rome when men and women were bound not by limited notions of love and
affection....

--Dexippus

Subject:	Prayers for a child
From:	amethystcrystallight@--------)
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 21:11:08 -0500

Salvete!!

I have volunteered to ask the people on the 2 big mailing lists I belong
to (Laura Ingalls Wilder and this one) to pray, chant, light candles, do
whatever voodoo they do so well for the son of the woman giving Terre
--------I S--------u--------(Leg----------------...). He h--------een di--------sed with
meningitis and will be spending the next 48 - 72 hours in the hospital.
He is 10 1/2 months old.

Terre is showing no signs (thank the Gods) and neither am I (a big deal,
since I'm pregnant), but I will be keeping an eye on both of us.

His Hebrew name is impossible for me to figure out how to spell, but I do
believe the Gods will know who your talking about if you mention Rafi
Strauss.

Thanks.

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

Subject:	Voting and the Assemblies
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" germanicus@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 22:18:20 -0400

Salvete Omnes!

Given recent events, I've had the opportunity and need to look through the
voting procedures in our Constitution. Just to overview, we have three
assemblies; the Comitia Populi (which has tribes), the Comitia Centuriata
(which has centuries), and the Comitia Plebis (which has tribes, and is only
made up of plebian Citizens). By the way, all Citizens are assigned to
centuries and tribes as they join; it just hasn't been relevant before now
(the two votes that have taken place were in the Comitia Centuriata, and
each Century is only made up of one person, which made things easy).

Historically, the Comitia Populi was a "rump assembly" that had theoretical
power to pass laws, but never did so in fact. Their role was ceremonial; to
rubber-stamp appointments and elections of magistrates, handle some obscure
points of law and family, etc. Obviously we need to get the elections going
for the speakers of the tribes of the Comitia Populi, but I think we should
get rid of even the theoretical capability to pass laws, as that power was
quickly taken over historically by the other two Assemblies.

Both the Comitia Centuriata and the Comitia Plebis currently elect speakers
of their centuries and tribes, who then vote on any given issue. While that
was needed when votes were taken face-to-face, I think that it's an
unnecessary complication today. I would propose that we should change the
wording so that the centuries and tribes vote directly, and the majority
within each carries the day. (Thus, everyone in tribe I is counted, and the
majority determines which way the tribe votes. Everyone in tribe II votes,
and the majority determines the vote for the tribe. Etc.)

This isn't an official call for a vote to change things, but just to get
peoples' thoughts on the issue. Anyone?

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus

"The Roman Republic is Reborn!"

Nova Roma
Post Office Box 1688
Morristown, NJ 07962
www.novaroma.org

Subject:	Festus' last word on "all that".
From:	AstUsari@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 23:11:45 EDT

Just for the record, I did not initiate any religious discussion. I
responded to a remark made by Pythia, and that launched it all.

What strikes me, however, is how upset some people get when their precious
notions are challenged. Someone makes a remark that Christainity was the
major factor in Rome's fall, I challenge that viewpoint...and Festus is the
bad guy, trying to "get a rise out of people". Or someone complains about
mean ol' Paul missionizing. I post another historical perspective {and
discussion and interpretation of history is acceptable, is it not?} and Festus
is out spreading discord. Well, sorry I do not live in this highly sensitive,
PC world, where the illusion that all beliefs are right is Gospel, so that no
one has their feelings hurt {heaven forbid!}. If my posts have offended
anyone, wipe your nose on your togas and deal with it. Others have freely
expressed, or in Pythia's case, vented, their views, and I make no apologies
for doing so myself.

However, the last day or so has given me time to reflect on the stated
purposes and goals of Nova Roma. While some seem sensible and agreeable to
me, others seem more impractical {the forum idea} and some silly and
superstitious {the Religio-Romana}. Only a neo-pagan, who selects his gods in
the same manner as selecting ice cream flavors, really has a vested interest
in Nova Roma. And the "restoration" of this ancient state religion is one of
the main goals. And as I frankly do not believe these gods exist, and have
no desire to worship them, and still less desire to assist others in their
promulgation of these deities, I realize I was hasty and joined too fast, not
taking more time to evaluate the purposes before signing off on them, and for
that, I do apologise. I do not believe a person should belong to any
organization when he does not support the beliefs or goals whole heartedly,
just as "pro-choice Catholics" should not be in the Roman Catholic Church.
So, I have emailed the censors, and am discontinuing further citizenship, and
ending the Lupinia gens. Any person considering joining Nova Roma, who would
like the name "Lupinia" as their gens name, is welcome to it.

Sincerely, Stuart Smith

Subject:	Re: Festus' last word on "all that".
From:	pythia kingan@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 23:39:59 +0000

>



>



> Others have freely
> expressed, or in Pythia's case, vented, their views, and I make no apologies
> for doing so myself.
>

> I apologize to you if my comments precipitated your decicion to leave. I saw
> the direction this thread was going and I backed off. Whether or not I was
> "venting" is up to the beholder's POV, I suppose. I certainly don't want you
be
> uncomfortable here and I am sure that was not the goal of anyone else. I hope
> you find a list where you are more at home.

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: Festus' last word on "all that".
From:	Megas-Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 23:46:34 -0700

Salus et Fortuna Pythia, Salve:

I brought up the point about being able to vote with one's feet in
the chatroom over the night of 15-16 August, which Stuart has apparently
done.

I don't think you, or anyone on the list precipitated Stuart's
departure. From the way the discussion was going, I could, from past
organizational discussion experience, see about half way through, that
he was trying to get his fixed views across to the rest of us before he
departed. The admonitions of "superstition" and "ice-cream flavor" were
indicators not of debate, but arguement. No one is satisfied in an
arguement. Adults can discuss, and agree to disagree on certain points,
and move on. Those who wish to generate more heat than light, argue.
(This is in the understanding I have of the terms from debate class many
dozens of moons ago.)

I have sent a reply to the Censors in reply for the call for members of
the differing Priesthoods of the Religio Romana. I am, and have been
for several years, professed to the Holy Ones of the North (Odin,
Frigga, Thor, Sif, Frey, Freya, but espeially Ullr and Skadi). I sent a
note stating that I will not stand for the priesthood, or other public
office, which duties entail leading rites of the Religio. I shall
gladly attend such celebrations, as I see the Holy Ones of Olympus as
southern cousins to my own Deities.

I am a partial converse of the now departed Stuart. I am a
philosophical polytheist. I admit that the Initial Causation of All
That Is, is ultimately Unknown and Unknowable. We small Sparks of the
Universal Genius will be attracted to the image or images of the Whole
to which we can ascribe Meaning and Metaphysical "Homeness." The Aesir,
Vanir, Vaettir and Honored Ancestors of my Northern Forebears, Cultural
and Physical, are those Sparks which shine most brightly for me. Are
They All, no. Is the war god of the nomadic Ur-Semites All, no. They
are but Sparks of the Eternal Fire at the Center of All. (I know, why's
this dude from Thule sounding like a Mithraic Priest? Past Paths I have
trod.) The Face of God is infinite, as the Faces in Creation are
infinite in variety.

Privately, while in Nove Roma, I am a follower of the Holy Ones of the
North. Publically, I shall pay heed to the Religio Romana. I
understood this when I applied for Citizenship. The Religio IS an
attempt to re-create certain of the practices of the PRE-Christian,
majority Religion of the Republic. The Empire period religions and
sects which came from north, east, south or west can be, along with the
rest of the Empire period, topics for discussion and study, but we are
striving to recreate the best that the Republic has to offer as lessons
of Culture, Society and Governance.

Ego Rostrum Descendens (check my declention someone?)

May All the Holy Ones Bless Thee, Thine and the Little Ones in Need of
Special Care!!!

Forward the Republic!

S. Ullerius Venator

Subject:	Re: McCullough
From:	"Robert Woolwine" Alexious@--------
Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 1998 22:37:22 -0700

Yes, please add it to your list. She has done her research very
thouroughly. As a matter of fact, I am expecting a list of her resources
that assisted her in writing her book. I have already gone through
Plutarch, and Suetonius (sp.) Her glossary is very helpful and thourough,
and in each book, she changes certain entries to fit the novel.

I for one, prefer primary or near primary sources, however, once exposed to
the First Man in Rome Series, I have, it seems, been brought to almost
observe history via her works. And, I am very much waiting for her next
segment. Which I have heard will come out sometime next year!

Quaestor Lucius Cornelius Sulla


-----Original Message-----
Fro--------reg Rothenberger gregor59@--------
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Sunday, August 16, 1998 9:41 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: McCullough


>Fro--------reg Rothenberger gregor59@--------
>
>
>
>m--------oon@-------- wrote:
>
>> > That was a fun series! Have you read the books by Colleen McCullough?
>> >
>> And if you haven't, rest assured that the esteemed Consul will make sure
>> that you DO! And you'll be very grateful. Before he and Pat introduced
>> me to the Masters of Rome series, all I had read was the murky and kind
>> of soppy Thorn Birds.
>
>I've looked at it, but since the author also wrote "Thornbirds," I was
>hesitant
>about reading it. I wanted to read some others first. But, from what I've
>heard here, it's not the same. So, I'll add it to my list.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Greg
>Louisville, Kentucky (USA)
>gregor59@--------
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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.
>