Subject:	Praefecti/Hispania Q&A
From:	legion6@--------
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 05:03:20 -0600 (CST)

Salvete omnes...and welcome back to the Nova Roma Radio Hour!!

This week's topic is: Titles of Provincial Officials. Sounds tame?
Missing the bad old days? --I think NOT! There has been lots of
excitement and good, solid information exchange over this one--and
that's what we're here for!! --Today we'll be taking questions from
our callers. Caller One...?

Call_1: OK, let me see if I got this straight...
>>Legatus:
>> - Under the Republic, governed a subsection of a Province for a
>> Proconsul/Propraetor.
>>Legatus Augusti pro praetore:
>> - Under the Empire, governed a Province for the Emperor.
>>Legatus Legionis:
>> - Under the Empire, commander of a Legion.
>
>It makes sense. The Legati Augusti pro praetore in Lusitania were then
>the governors. Good. But if they were called pro praetore, who was the
>Praetor? The Emperor himself?

Yes, in an Imperial Province the emperor himself was considered to be
the Praetor, and, like any good Praetor, he was authorized (massive
understatement!) to appoint Legati to run things for him in places
where he couldn't be, and to take care of the day-to-day administration
of the Province. Caller 2...?

Call_2:
>Since Nova Roma seeks to model itself primarily on the
>Roman Republic, it would seem that the current system of naming
>provincial officials is quite appropriate. Praetors should remain
>praetors; if they are re-appointed, they become Propraetors. Consuls
>likewise become proconsuls if they retain administration of their
>provinces.

Okay, I'm with you so far...

>Procurator, Praefectus, legatus are names for functions that so far do
>not exist here, so let's leave them be for now. I was all gung-ho
>about the term "praefectus" a few days ago, but this post has pointed
>out that the praefectus was a purely imperial thing.

Okay! I agree that Nova Roma has not seen the need for Procuratores
(to administer finance for a Province) or Praefecti (to govern small
military districts) as of yet...though that can change. But I do think
the position of Legatus has both Republican precedent and current
usefulness. Our Provinces tend to be a little on the large side, and
according to the Web site are subdivided into Regiones which, at least
in the U.S., correspond pretty closely to the boundaries of individual
States.

Before we continue, let me recap the basic setup for Legati:
Legatus:
- Under the Republic, governed a subsection of a Province for a
Proconsul/Propraetor.
Legatus Augusti pro praetore:
- Under the Empire, governed a Province for the Emperor.

I take it your objection is based on the Imperial example, but as you
can see, a Republican Propraetor could also appoint a Legatus to see to
those far-flung corners of his domain. This can be a useful thing!!
I'm sure our governors could use a little help, and according to their
job description they may set up the administration of their 'turf' as
they see fit, up to and including appointing sub-officials to assist
(although I'm pretty sure such apointments would need to be confirmed
by the Senate...any Senators out there who can enlighten me on this
point?) So we may see Legati for individual U.S. states, Italian
regios or Canadian provinces.

Here's my idea: I think provincial Praetors/Propraetors should be able
to appoint Legati for any subsections that need one, subject to
confirmation by the Senate. If a Province does not have a Praetor, as
has unfortunately become the case in several Provinces recently, I
believe the Senate itself should be able to appoint a Legatus for an
active Regio.

Now, what to call such an official...? We don't have an Augustus
(emperor), so this legate would not be a Legatus Augusti. There's also
some doubt as to whether the term 'pro praetore' would apply; as the
legate would be appointed by the Senate (not by a Provincial Praetor)
and be administering a Regio (not a Provincia), he would not really be
exercising Praetorian powers. (If you're gonna appoint a Legatus for a
whole Province, why not just appoint a Praetor?)

Okay, radio listeners, it's my turn to ask: What do YOU think of my
idea? Any suggestions for nomenclature? ...Now going over to Caller
Three!

Call_3:
>I have to admit that I am still a little hesitant about these titles.
>I am still leaning (though less so after all the discussion back and
>forth) towards legatus based on all that has been discussed. Perhaps
>Legatus Provinciae. A provincial legate or Legate of a province. It is
>not historical but it does not necessarily have to be. We can alter
>the titles somewhat if doing so would be beneficial to us.

Talk about timing! Legatus Provinciae might work...just as long as
everyone understood that this didn't mean the legate was responsible
for the whole Province, only that he'd been appointed (by either his
Praetor or the Senate) to do useful work within a Province. I have no
doubt that my fellow Nova Romans can make this distinction with grace
and ease; it's no more difficult, really, than the terminology that
separates elected Urban Praetors from appointed Provincial Praetors,
and we've all managed to wrap our brains around that...haven't we...?
>({|;-)

Okay, we've got time for a few postcard quickies before we'll have to
wrap it up. Here's the first...
>...the "pro" prefix seems to have been used in the Roman republic
>mainly to identify a magistrate whose imperium was being extended
>(prorogued? Is that the word? anyone, Fabi, Fimbria, Callide?).

Wow--I'm being petitioned in the same breath as the noble Quintus
Fabius and the honorable Tullius Callidus! I'm in excellent company!!
Yes, 'prorogued' is the term for a magistrate's imperium having been
extended past his term of office.

Next out of the mailbag:
>The reason that I prefer "praefectus" over "legatus" is that the
>latter to me implies a subordinate military commander, like Titus
>Labienus was Caesar's legatus in Gaul.

Well, there were legati legionem, but that was something else
entirely... The thing to understand is that, for the Romans, 'legatus'
was one of those all-purpose-type words for anyone who had been
delegated by someone in authority to do things on behalf of the
authorizing official. A bit like the way the term 'Vice President' is
used in the corporate world...you've got your Assistant VPs, your
Executive VPs, your Incidental, Accidental, and Associated Amalgamated
VPs...Hey, even Marius Fimbria the Walking Database has trouble sorting
*them* out.

On the peaceful side for the term 'Legatus', if you hang around in
diplomatic circles, a 'legate' is an emissary and a 'legation' is an
office somewhere in size between a consulate (love that term!) and a
full-blown embassy.

Last letter:
>...I think that the praetor urbanus/praetor provinciae system works
>and is perhaps preferable to alternatives, but will continue to cause
>confusion. Maybe one/some of us should come up with a FAQ section
>explaining it...

A capital suggestion, sir! Actually, what I'd really like to see on
the site are the job descriptions for the various magistracies that
were posted to the mailing-List at the start of the campaign season.
What do you say, Quirites...?

Okay, our time's just about up... In parting, I have one more question
for you, my loyal listeners: What's wrong with doing things the way
the Empire did 'em once in a while? Many of the comments I've heard on
several issues seem to imply a strong distaste in Nova Roma for
anything not cut strictly out of Republican cloth. Yet our stated aim
is to revive the BEST of Classical Rome, and that means the Empire as
well as the Republic...

My two coppers: I think the Provinces were much better-administered
under the Empire than during Republican times, when a propraetorship
was often as not seen as 'my one year to get filthy rich'. (Whoa--I'm
talking about the past here, *not* implying anything about our current
crop of Propraetors...put down that onion!) We owe our Citizens the
best government we can give them, whatever its roots--as long as it's
classical Roman. Mea sententia...

...and that, my friends, is a wrap! Stay tuned for a word from our
sponsors...

ROMA RESURGENS!!!
---
__________ _<~) __________
<-\\\\@@@@@) /##\ (@@@@@////-> Märia Villarroel <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a>
<-\\\@@@@(#####@@@@///-> Historical Re-Creationist
<-\\\*##*///-> and Citizen of Rome
o---<<<<||SPQR||>>>>---o Latin lessons, History lectures
///\\\ Role-playing Games, too!

aka Lucius Marius Fimbria on the weekends

Subject:	SE USA Province Web Site
From:	pallasathene@--------
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 08:18:03 -0500 (EST)

Salvete, Quirites!

I am pleased to announce that the SE USA Provincia Web Site, as well as the message board is up and running successfully! The URL is:

<a href="http://members.xoom.com/Iucundia/" target="_top" >http://members.xoom.com/Iucundia/</a>

Please feel free to stop in and browse and run up the hit counter!

Also, there are a few of you that I missed in my province. Please notify me and I will update the site, gladly. I will understand if you are ticked that I did not mention you! Please correct me...

Studiose,

Minervina Iucundia Flavia
Propraetor SE USA Provincia

----------------------------------------------------------------
Get your free email from AltaVista at <a href="http://altavista.iname.com" target="_top" >http://altavista.iname.com</a>

Subject:	Re: Praefecti/Hispania Q&A
From:	"Lucius" vergil@--------
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 10:58:03 -0500

Salvete Quirites

I just want to bring up some points to clear up this matter as it
pertains to Nova Roma.


>From: <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a>
>This week's topic is: Titles of Provincial Officials. Sounds tame?
>Call_1: OK, let me see if I got this straight...
>>>Legatus:
>>> - Under the Republic, governed a subsection of a Province for a
>>> Proconsul/Propraetor.
>>>Legatus Augusti pro praetore:
>>> - Under the Empire, governed a Province for the Emperor.
>>>Legatus Legionis:
>>> - Under the Empire, commander of a Legion.
>
>Call_2:
>>Since Nova Roma seeks to model itself primarily on the
>>Roman Republic, it would seem that the current system of naming
>>provincial officials is quite appropriate. Praetors should remain
>>praetors; if they are re-appointed, they become Propraetors. Consuls
>>likewise become proconsuls if they retain administration of their
>>provinces.
>
>Okay, I'm with you so far...
>Okay! I agree that Nova Roma has not seen the need for Procuratores
>(to administer finance for a Province) or Praefecti (to govern small
>military districts) as of yet...

>(although I'm pretty sure such apointments would need to be confirmed
>by the Senate...any Senators out there who can enlighten me on this
>point?) So we may see Legati for individual U.S. states, Italian
>regios or Canadian provinces.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

<a href="http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/senatus_consulta.html" target="_top" >http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/senatus_consulta.html</a>


"Standardization of Titles for Provincial Magistrates"
(Proposed by Flavius Vedius Germanicus 8/4/98. No voting deadline. Approved
without dissenting votes 8/7/98.)

In keeping with the authority granted to the Senate by Article III,
Paragraph 3, of the Constitution, I would like to propose that the Senate
change the titles of the governors of our provinciae according to the
following guidelines. Please note that this is a change only to their title,
and has no impact on their duties, powers, and functions.

*Currently-serving Consuls governing provinciae shall be titled Consul.
*Former Consuls who are continuing to govern a province after their term as
Consul ends shall be titled Proconsul.
*Magistrates appointed by the Senate to govern a particular province for the
first time shall be titled Praetor.
*Praetors who continue to govern a province after their first term of office
ends shall be titled Propraetor.
*Magistrates appointed by governors to assist in the administration of their
province shall be titled Legate.
As far as I have been able to determine, these titles are consistent
with the usage in the mid-late Republic, and therefore, in my opinion, are
quite appropriate for our purpose. I ask that the Senate approve this system
as the regular
nomenclature of Nova Roma.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------

<a href="http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/constitution.html" target="_top" >http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/constitution.html</a>

ART.III sec.3 "Governors shall be appointed by Senatus consulta to govern
those provinciae for which no Consul has been placed in charge, for a term
of one year (with no limit on re-appointments to the position). The Senate
shall determine the proper title for such Governors, in keeping with the
ancient example of the Roman Republic. Each Governor shall have the
following powers:
1. holding Imperium;
2. veto over the actions of lesser magistrates within the provincia they
govern, and;
3. govern the provincia in which he or she resides, and/or shall be assigned
by the Senate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
>Here's my idea: I think provincial Praetors/Propraetors should be able
>to appoint Legati for any subsections that need one, subject to
>confirmation by the Senate. If a Province does not have a Praetor, as
>has unfortunately become the case in several Provinces recently, I
>believe the Senate itself should be able to appoint a Legatus for an
>active Regio.
>
Governors already have this power. If a citizens can be a Legatus in a
Provincia that does not have a Consul, Proconsul, etc... why not just be the
Praetor Provincia?

>Now, what to call such an official...?
>
This is already answered, "*Magistrates appointed by governors to
assist in the administration of their province shall be titled Legate. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
The key term above is "Magistrates".

<a href="http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/constitution.html" target="_top" >http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/constitution.html</a>

"Article VI: Public Religious Institutions
1. The Religio Romana, the worship of the Gods and Goddesses of Rome, shall
be the official religion of the State. All magistrates and Senators, as
officers of the State, shall be required to observe the Sacred Days of the
Year, and to honor and offer sacrifice to the Gods and Goddesses that made
and make Rome great. Citizens need not be practitioners of the Religio
Romana, but may not engage in any activity that intentionally blasphemes or
defames the Gods, the Religio Romana, or its practitioners, and Magistrates
and Senators shall be required to pay due honor to the Gods."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------

Anyone wishing to apply for an appointment should send their
applicatio-------- the Se-------- at: <a href="/post/--------roma?protectID=061056234237175198015158190036129" >se--------@--------</a>
I hope that this has been helpful in answering anyones questions.

Valete sodales Cives, Consul L Equitius Cincinnatus

Subject:	Re: Praefecti/Hispania Q&A and Republic vs Empire
From:	"RMerullo" rmerullo@--------
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 11:29:48 -0500

Salvete Lucia Maria et alii auditores



>From: <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a>
>


It seems to this caller :) that there is no need just yet for subordinate
provincial officials. Maybe it's just because I am a plain vanilla civis
without access to proceedings of the Senate, debates of magistrates and all
that stuff, but, I have heard nothing from any magistrates yet to indicate
that there is a need for subordinate provincial officials. I thought that
the point of the thread thus far was what nomenclature to use for provincial
chief executives, whether to call them "Praetor", "Propraetor", "Legatus" or
something else.

Nevertheless, and I'm a little embarrassed to admit it, I am kind of
enjoying this discussion, especially this mock radio show device.

>Before we continue, let me recap the basic setup for Legati:
>Legatus:
> - Under the Republic, governed a subsection of a Province for a
> Proconsul/Propraetor.
>Legatus Augusti pro praetore:
> - Under the Empire, governed a Province for the Emperor.

later you wrote-
Legatus Provinciae might work...just as long as
>everyone understood that this didn't mean the legate was responsible
>for the whole Province, only that he'd been appointed (by either his
>Praetor or the Senate) to do useful work within a Province. I have no
>doubt that my fellow Nova Romans can make this distinction with grace
>and ease; it's no more difficult, really, than the terminology that
>separates elected Urban Praetors from appointed Provincial Praetors,
>and we've all managed to wrap our brains around that...haven't we...?
>>({|;-)

Well, I think that I have grasped the Praetor Urbanus/Praetor Provinciae
differentiation, but, it took me a while; it would have been more confusing
if there had been legati provinciae in the mix. Certainly, if praetores
provinciarum see a real need for assistance, then some sort of official like
this would have to be instituted as you say; is there such a need?
>
>I take it your objection is based on the Imperial example, but as you
>can see, a Republican Propraetor could also appoint a Legatus to see to
>those far-flung corners of his domain. This can be a useful thing!!
>I'm sure our governors could use a little help, and according to their
>job description they may set up the administration of their 'turf' as
>they see fit, up to and including appointing sub-officials to assist
>(although I'm pretty sure such apointments would need to be confirmed
>by the Senate...any Senators out there who can enlighten me on this
>point?) So we may see Legati for individual U.S. states, Italian
>regios or Canadian provinces.

OK.
>
>Here's my idea: I think provincial Praetors/Propraetors should be able
>to appoint Legati for any subsections that need one, subject to
>confirmation by the Senate. If a Province does not have a Praetor, as
>has unfortunately become the case in several Provinces recently, I
>believe the Senate itself should be able to appoint a Legatus for an
>active Regio.

OK.
>

>Next out of the mailbag:
>>The reason that I prefer "praefectus" over "legatus" is that the
>>latter to me implies a subordinate military commander, like Titus
>>Labienus was Caesar's legatus in Gaul.
>
>
>On the peaceful side for the term 'Legatus', if you hang around in
>diplomatic circles, a 'legate' is an emissary and a 'legation' is an
>office somewhere in size between a consulate (love that term!) and a
>full-blown embassy.

Can you find examples of peaceful 'legati' in Roman Republican history? I
am not saying that there were not any, just that I cannot think of any. In
your earlier piece, you wrote about the origin of the province concept as
being derived from the theater of a magistrate's command; in the Republic,
legati would command troops under, or on behalf of, the primary magistrate
(praetor, consul, propraetor or proconsul). Do you have examples of legati
doing other things (less military) in the provinces in Republican times (not
that there were many provinces in those times - but how about in Africa or
the Spanish provinces, or in Asia?)?.
>
>Last letter:
>>...I think that the praetor urbanus/praetor provinciae system works
>>and is perhaps preferable to alternatives, but will continue to cause
>>confusion. Maybe one/some of us should come up with a FAQ section
>>explaining it...
>
>A capital suggestion, sir! Actually, what I'd really like to see on
>the site are the job descriptions for the various magistracies that
>were posted to the mailing-List at the start of the campaign season.
>What do you say, Quirites...?

Actually, Article III of the constitution does provide a rudimentary
framework of this. Interestingly, it refers to the provincial
administrators simply as 'governors'. But you're right, a more meaty set of
job descriptions would look nice on the site.
>
>Okay, our time's just about up... In parting, I have one more question
>for you, my loyal listeners: What's wrong with doing things the way
>the Empire did 'em once in a while? Many of the comments I've heard on
>several issues seem to imply a strong distaste in Nova Roma for
>anything not cut strictly out of Republican cloth. Yet our stated aim
>is to revive the BEST of Classical Rome, and that means the Empire as
>well as the Republic...

This is a really interesting question about which I could spout
indefinitely. First of all, I am not sure that I would call Imperial Rome
"classical" at all. That word to me implies late Republic, although I could
be wrong in my interpretation of it. But more important than that, I have
no desire to be a citizen of the Empire. I would never worship another
human being and therefore could not serve a modern Diocletian; indeed, I
would find the idea totally repugnant. No offense to worshippers of Divus
Augustus, but, I view much of later Roman history as inherently sad, despite
its achievements and periods of remarkable stability and growth of
civilization, because, to my mind, it could have been so much better had the
Republican system been genuinely reformed and kept in practice.

Sure, everyone loves to read about a figure like G. Iulius Caesar; noone
can deny that he was great. But he and his successors (and some Republican
figures before him too) warped and twisted the Republican system to elevate
themselves above others. Their rule worked and brought rapid expansion and
development under some, but then led to Nero and similar abortions. Indeed,
while it is tempting to look at Roman history and think of a Pax Romana
lasting from Augustus to Romulus Augustolus, you know that this view is
totally unrealistic: from Septimius Severus and on, for instance, the pay
of the army went up, up, up, triggering inflation with which no Roman
emperor could ever effectively deal, and poverty seems to have increased
enormously throughout the Empire, such that by Constantine's time, a caste
system had to be instituted and most business be conducted by barter to keep
the economy crawling by. I am not putting the Roman Empire down, just
trying to explain why I do not view it as a golden age by any means. Nor as
a thing to recreate.
>
>My two coppers: I think the Provinces were much better-administered
>under the Empire than during Republican times, when a propraetorship
>was often as not seen as 'my one year to get filthy rich'.

Yes, Mommsen states this in his preface or introduction to "Provinces of the
Roman Empire"; administration was better, at least during certain periods
of the Empire (although I'll laugh anyone in the face who claims that there
was good Roman government anywhere in the world at other times, such as
mid-third century CE, when, most of the time, there was no real Emperor,
just a bunch of generals alternately defending borders and attacking each
other to get themselves or their puppets proclaimed imperator)

(Whoa--I'm
>talking about the past here, *not* implying anything about our current
>crop of Propraetors...put down that onion!) We owe our Citizens the
>best government we can give them, whatever its roots--as long as it's
>classical Roman. Mea sententia...

I agree. I do not think that it should be off-limits occasionally to adapt
an institution from imperial times, as long as we do not do so by default,
and realize that we are compromising out of necessity to do it.
>
>ROMA RESURGENS!!!
>---
Valete

Gaius Marius Merullus

Subject:	Re: Praefecti/Hispania Q&A
From:	SFP55@--------
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:34:43 EST

In a me--------e dated 2/5/99 3:03:31 AM Pacific Standard Time, <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a>
writes:

To Marus Fimbria from Q. Fabius
Vale. I have a couple of corrections to your list. In this I'm following
Mommsen and Hammond. Keppie is not these men.

>>Legatus: - Under the Republic, governed a subsection of a Province for a
Proconsul/Propraetor.>>
Yes, no more then 22 allowed
> >Legatus Augusti pro praetore: Under the Empire, governed a Province for the
Emperor.<< Only if he had 3 or more Legiones under his command or it was an
Imperial province. In Egypt he was a Praefectus.

>>Legatus Legionis:
>> - Under the Empire, commander of a Legion.
Until Severus. Then they became Praefecti

>>...the "pro" prefix seems to have been used in the Roman republic
mainly to identify a magistrate whose imperium was being extended
(prorogued? Is that the word? anyone, Fabi, Fimbria, Callide?).<<

Actually the correct word in Latin is: prorogatio (f) which according to my
handy Oxford dictionary means "extension of a term of office; postponement."

>> The thing to understand is that, for the Romans, 'legatus'
was one of those all-purpose-type words for anyone who had been
delegated by someone in authority to do things on behalf of the
authorizing official.<<
Good explanation. In fact in the Later Empire, frustrated officials changed
and added many new titles, some that are still used by the Catholic Church
today.

>>What's wrong with doing things the way
the Empire did 'em once in a while? Many of the comments I've heard on
several issues seem to imply a strong distaste in Nova Roma for
anything not cut strictly out of Republican cloth. Yet our stated aim
is to revive the BEST of Classical Rome, and that means the Empire as
well as the Republic...<<
Here we part company. What's the point of studying institutions of the
Republic during the Principate? They were either meaningless or abolished.
Give me the Middle Republic any day.

>>My two coppers: I think the Provinces were much better-administered
under the Empire than during Republican times, when a propraetorship
was often as not seen as 'my one year to get filthy rich'. (Whoa--I'm
talking about the past here, *not* implying anything about our current
crop of Propraetors...put down that onion!) We owe our Citizens the
best government we can give them, whatever its roots--as long as it's
classical Roman.<<
Now you are being ridiculous. Our Praetors "govern" at the benevolence of
the people of their provinces. If my good friend Antonious Graechus was
removed from his praetorship of Lusitania, by Portugal, what exactly are we
going to do? Send two Legiones under a Praetor to restore him? I doubt out
of all the current legiones today, we have enough numbers to even muster a
Vexillatio. No, provinces exist as an intellectual exercise for NR. It gives
us something to do. As for our Praetors, if they could get .1% of the GNP of
the provinces they "govern" I would not begrudge them 50% of it. Because we
would still be rich.

Maybe in 15 years when we have a homeland we can give something to the world.
I suspect it will be the Roman Religio. Power comes from two things Wealth
and influence. And unless one of us is Bill Gates (has anybody thought of
recruiting him?) we will be lacking both.
Rome's power sprang from two things. The Pila that the troops carried, and
the better form of government Rome offered. We can only offer the Religio,
and not all of us practice that! Hopefully this will change. Since the new
century is coming, there is no reason that our beliefs can't be in the
forefront.

>>...and that, my friends, is a wrap!>> Umm no, you sign off in radio.
Wrap is the end of a shooting day for movies and TV shows. The "martini" is
the final shot before wrap, and final wrap is the end of the shoot.
Vale.

Subject:	From The Rostra: Address to the Plebeian Order
From:	Masterofhistory masterofhistory@--------
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 17:34:41 -0800 (PST)

Greetings to the Plebeian people of Nova Roma!

With the blessings of Ianvs, I have managed to survive yet another
Ianvarivs in Minnesota. Wherever you might be, I hope the year
MMDCCLII AUC (1999) is off to a good start.

This is my first address to the Plebeian Order as a Tribune of the
People, over the course of the year I plan to address you at regular
intervals and as events warrant. As one of the Order's elected
officials and representatives in the Senate I am obliged both to keep
you, the Plebeians informed of the issues before the Senate and to
bring any ideas and concerns you may have to the floor of the
assemblies. Please feel free to contact me by e-mail, ICQ or look for
me in the Forum Romanum.

In the interests of furthering the ease of communication and
establishing the political assemblies of Nova Roma, I am pleased to
announce the creation of a rudimentary Plebeian assembly. This
Concilium Plebis, as I call it, consists of a mailing list that
Plebeians may subscribe to. Just e-mail your address to me at
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029166066165056209112225046026229222078143100196169130152150" >masterofhistor--------..</a> and I will put --------on the list. I plan
use this list to send information to the Plebeian Order and to obtain
your opinions on issues facing the Republic.

Regarding other business, I have recently given an address to the
Senate concerning, among other things, the formation of Political
assemblies, Religio Romana and sources of Roman Law. If anyone is
interested in reading excerpts of this speech, just let me know and
I'll forward a copy to you. Also, as you may or may not know our
Plebeian Aedile and myself have been corresponding on the subject of
Plebeian associated religious cults and celebrations. Please visit
the Aedile's Lusitania webpage or contact one of us for more
information. If you have anything you'd like to contribute, please
let me know.







==
Respectfully,
Avidius Tullius Callidus
Paterfamilias, gens Tullia
Tribune of the People

Subject:	Plebian Tribune
From:	jmath669642reng@--------)
Date:	Fri, 5 Feb 1999 20:53:57 -0500 (EST)

Salve, Plebian Tribune Avidius Tullius Callidus;

I suppose I should not be posting this message, but since we apparently
have the same idea (seeing that Nova Roma moves ahead) I feel that I can
write you personnally without doing your reputation any harm. If
because of my new patrician standing yo would rather not correspond with
me I will understand.

I have been asked to do very little since taking office, and I was
wondering if you are sensing the same hesitation that I am in the senior
magistrates. There is little common reporting about what is going on,
and what is being considered, so that it is very hard to determine where
a Quaestor should involve himself. I am supposed to be the Assist, to
Consul Cincinnatus, but I have not done much. I don't want you to say
anything to the Consul, but if you could let me know from time to time
what is going on, maybe I could put my oar in. As it is, I do not feel
that my standing for office is serving Nova Roma very well. Any
assistance that you feel would not detract from your positionwould be
appreciated.

Very Respectfully;
Marcus Minucius Audens
Quaestor

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!