| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
JusticeCMO@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 00:16:37 EDT |
|
In a message dated 7/19/99 10:06:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------; writes:
<< Note: I've had to split this up into two posts, since my Email program
couldn't handle such a big chunk of text all at once. Happy snoring - er,
reading, all!
>>
Having read all of the posts on this subject to date, it appears to me that
this boils down to a case of Cassius' word against Cinncinnatus'. Having met
Cassius in person, I believe I know which side of that particlular fence to
land on. However, my ears remain open.....although it does lead me to
question even more strongly those who are lobbying for the reinstatement of
Cincinnatus!!
Watchful and waiting for Part II
Priscilla Vedia Serena
|
| Subject: |
Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 2 |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 00:21:48 EDT |
|
Salve,
My apologies for having to post this in two parts. It was too long for my
Email program to send in one piece:
Cassius:
>Then of course, with April came the NEW crisis. The whole issue with Sulla
>and the Senate board blew up... and the Senate basically ceased to exist.
>Cincinnatus and Flavia Claudia were determined to strip Sulla of his
>Citizenship,
>Cincinnatus: This is not true. Neither Flavia or I made any mention of
exile. I only wanted the citizens to know what had happened. No one ever
said anything about Sulla's citizenship but you, Cassius.
Cassius:
That happens to be completely false. Both of you wanted to hang Sulla -
Flavia Claudia finally decided that she'd been wrong about it and apologized
to him this last month. Hopefully some other members of the Senate will back
me up on this one.
Cassius:
everybody else thought it just wasn't that big an issue. Both
>Germanicus and Flavia Claudia resigned, then came back. Nobody would talk
to
>anybody else (except to me... I managed to stay on speaking terms with
>everyone) and NO business was done for something like 30 full days. In
>effect, Nova Roma had no government whatsoever above the level of
Provincial
>Praetor. The only office that WAS still functioning was that of Censor...
> Cincinnatus: That is because Sulla had hacked into the Senate and we needed
to find a new place for the Senate to meet.
Cassius:
As I recall, a new place was set up within a couple of days. However, having
a place to meet didn't solve all the hurt feelings from the arguments that
had taken place over the issue. The Senate just plain wouldn't talk with
itself anymore.
>
Cassius:
>You know, thinking back, that would have been a GOOD time to quit Nova Roma
>altogether on the spot. Well, 20/20 hindsight! ;)
>
CIncinnatus: Yes, this seems to be the popular answer, Quit.
"Winners never quit and quitters never win."
Cassius:
OH! I always thought that was QUILTERS! One of the many reasons I never took
up sewing in fact. NOW you tell me!
>Finally, Cincinnatus was able to force through the ridiculous reprimand for
>Sulla, and then started to propose new business.
> CIncinnatus: You were the only one to vote against it, After you told us you
supported a reprimand. I also posted Sulla's tax proposal and the propsal
for the Sodalitas Pro Infantia to the Senate and took the heat for those not
being accepted, like I was Dictator and I could just say "yea, sure whatever".
Cassius:
I NEVER supported a reprimand for Sulla. You're just plain remembering
wrongly here. I certainly did vote against a reprimand - I voted as I said I
would all along. The only thing I can think of here is that I might have made
mention to the fact that I was going to be outvoted by the rest of the
Senate.
Cassius:
The Senate tentatively
>started to meet again. Cincinnatus announced to Decius Iunius and myself
>that he had a plan for the tribes and Centuries. This was in May I believe.
>Then, when he announced his idea...
Cincinnatus: I had discussed ideas with Palladius by phone and there were
none that were "unworkable", only different ideas. In any case the tribes
,like the citizens infomation, would be a job that would have to be
continually kept up by the Censores.
Cassius:
Oh, whatever. The proposition that came to me would have demanded constant
attention... as if the Censor's job wasn't already the worst job in all of
Nova Roma as far as commitment and detail. I just plain didn't want to be the
one having to constantly re-adjust the tribes for numerical Patrician/Plebian
equality.
>
Cassius:
>I explained to Cincinnatus that NOBODY could maintain such a system. The
>Censors would basically to have to check the entire tribal system every
time a new Citizen joined.. what a mess. In exasperation I took the job back,
and asked the Senate to please give Decius Iunius and I some assistance. I
also
>asked for assistance from folks in personal Emails.
>Cincinnatus: You never "took the job back", because it was always yours. I
only offered to help, but was only given infromation from you the week prior
to Roman Days. Nice bag job, you had over a year to do it and didn't, yet
you give me less that a week. Then when we meet you change your mind and
decide to go with Palladius' plan.
Cassius:
Sorry, Cincinnatus, but I'm the one accusing you of pulling a bag job. I
stated that I couldn't do the Tribes project and you took responsibility for
it. You didn't do it for four months, and then went ahead and helped Impeach
me for not doing the job in the first place! You didn't have less than a week
to do the job... you had from January till April. Even after THAT you were
still saying you'd do the tribes, but by then we'd asked for assistance from
others and gotten a bunch of different proposals. By Roman Days I was ready
to go with Sulla and Graecus' plan, because it was simple, easy to maintain,
and could be started quickly since by then the job was so overdue.
>
Cassius:
>And, that's when the flood started. Cincinnatus was still trying to push
his idea. Added to that was Callidius' huge and complex presentation, (even
>worse!) and input from something like a dozen other Citizens, including
>Graecus and Sulla and Germanicus. The agitation was getting extreme.
>Callidius refused to acknowledge that any plan but his existed...
>Cincinnatus: I don't think Calladius did anything but try to help. He was
always a very reasonable man, who has a great deal of knowledge.
Cassius:
I'm not going to say much since Callidius isn't here to defend himself. I
WILL say that he pushed his plan to the point of encouraging people create
disturbances on the list, etc... demanding that his and only his plan be put
through. Since by then we had something like five different plans for Tribes
on the table to consider, I find it hard to consider such tactics to be
"reasonable".
>
Cassius:
>Naturally, while we tried to make sense out of all the furor going on, yet
>another Crisis hit. Patricia was unable to carry on the website, and
resigned as Webmistress, leaving NR without anyone whatever to keep the site
going. Germanicus volunteered in her wake, and was promised the webmaster
position.The NR site was switched onto a new server, and Germanicus began to
make changes. Then - Gangalius volunteered for the website. Our Consuls felt
that Gangalius would make a better web person, so they stripped Germanicus of
the Webmaster title and handed it over to Gangalius.
> Cincinnnatus: This is NOT true. The Consules, Palladius and I, agreed that
the best way to avoid the problems of the past (The site not being
maintained for months) was to have 2 webmasters and we wanted BOTH Gangalius
and Germanicus to work together, IT was Germanicus who QUIT. He wanted
complete control or nothing. Aut Caesar aut nihil.
Cassius:
I'm not even going to go into this. It was a long, complex problem that could
easily start yet another huge list argument. There was both some
misunderstanding going on, but also some real interpersonal feuding. No
matter what it was yet another big freakin' crisis to deal with.
Cassius:
Yup, war again. OH! And...
>because we switched the server for the website, the Citizen application
form was down for some weeks. People couldn't get their forms in...
Cincinnatus: This was fixed by Patricia and when people asked they were told
to print up a application and send it in snail mail.
Cassius:
That kind of thing is a pretty poor fix. The people who had applied weren't
necessarily going back to the automatic application form, since they'd been
there and done that already. We had a lot of people who simply thought their
applications were being ignored for some reason, and we were flooded with
letters of inquiry/complaint. Surely you remember this problem - it's one of
the articles I was being Impeached on!
>
Cassius:
>Whew! Anyway. Decius Iunius finally decided that the only way the tribes
>could be sorted out would be in a face to face meeting, with a bunch of
>people sitting down together to hash out all the details. Roman Days!!!
(June 12 & 13) Cincinnatus said he'd bring his worked out schedule,
>Cincinnatus: Which I did, but you simply stated that you and Palladius would
do it by the formula that Palladius proposed. So I just said fine do it then.
Cassius:
What you brought to Roman Days was a partial printout of the Citizen's list -
showing Citizen's Roman Names, Gens, and Provincia. Nothing else. I believe
at the time we were ALL hoping that a Senate quorum would be there so a more
firm decision could be reached. Since that didn't happen, the quickest
solution was to go with Sulla and Graecus' plan.
>
Cassius:
>Well, it very nearly worked. At the last minute Decius Iunius wasn't able
to attend Roman Days. Cincinnatus showed up without his plan at all.
> Cincinnatus: BULL, Cassius, you started the discussion after it was
introduced by Audens by saying you and Palladius would do it, we all agreed
that since it was the job of the Censores in the first place there was no
need for further discussion. I had my list there, but there was no more talk
about it.
Cassius:
Again, what you did was print out some limited fields from the Citizens' list
the night before. That was NOT a complete plan for the Tribes. Since there
weren't enough Senators there for an "official" solution to be decided upon,
and since you hadn't brought a complete plan with you, I simply said the
Censor's would do it. We DID have Sulla and Graecus' plan in reserve by
then... something that could be done almost immediately upon my return home.
> Cassius:
> I sat down with everyone, we all hashed over what was going on with the
tribes, and I said I'd just do the things myself when I got back, whether
they were done
>right or not. A bit of an anticlimax after all the fuss, really!
Cincinnatus: Yes, when the subject came up during the meeting you simply
said that you and Palladius would do it by the formula that Palladius had
suggested. SO, since you and he were Censores it is your job, THAT was the
end of the discussion! Don't say I didn't have my plan.
Cassius:
"Cincinnatus, you DIDN'T have your...!" Oh, right. Sorry. Anyway, your...
er, "printed material" wasn't quite complete enough to be a better quick
solution than the plan we'd had from Sulla and Graecus. In fact, we'd have
just gone with that one earlier to get the situation over and done with, but
Callidius had sworn he'd veto it as Tribune of the Plebs, because he wanted
HIS idea put through. Callidius had only resigned his Citizenship a few days
before, making the choice possible.
>
Cassius:
>Now, I didn't get back home until June 21st,
>We got the new folks processed, and then completed the tribes, pretty much
as promised. <SNIP>But still, the tribes were done as of June 24th or so.
>Cincinnatus: Well, then why weren't they posted?? That would have ended the
whole affair but we have never seen them.
Cassius:
A couple of small things. I had trouble getting online because AOL was
failing for a couple of days. We had a big flood of new Citizens that had
come in while I was on vacation, (and I mean like 30 new people) who I tried
to process first when I finally COULD get online. Quite frankly, I didn't
know I was racing the clock any more than usual. I informed both you and
Sulla that there'd be another couple of days, not realizing that I was about
to be Impeached.
>
Cassius:
>The evening Decius and I were going to get the info up online, I got the
call from Flavia Claudia about the impeachment. Quite frankly, this was out
of
>left field! Gross negligence and dereliction of duty??? Something like 85%
>of my personal time has gone into Nova Roma for the last four years...
>Cincinnatus: It was yours and Palladius' job. It didn't get done, wasn't
getting done and still isn't done. Stop blaming everyone else.
Cassius:
It IS done. And, I sincerely hope that all future Magistrates of ANY kind
don't get treated like the two Censors were. There was more work in that
position than two people could do working one or two hours every evening...
that's more than any volunteer should have to manage. Nova Roma is NOT
supposed to be a full time non-paying job!
>
Cassius:
>Still, although the Committee went out of it's way not to leave me one tiny
>shred of self respect, that is NOT why I consulted with the Senate for
>Interregnum. And, please do note that while the Board of Directors was also
>consulted for legal matters, it was the SENATE that did this thing. In
accord were myself, Decius Iunius, Germanicus, Flavia Claudia, and Metellus.
The only Senator voting against Interregnum, oh, and for prosecution, was
>Cincinnatus.
> Cincinatus: I never voted on anything, Period. I did not convene the Senate
and if it was convened I was not informed via any media. The mysteryous
Metellus showed well where was he for all the other votes?
Cassius:
Since Nova Roma was in imminent danger of having one Consul Impeach the
other, and remove both Censors against the will of the Senate, it was
considered to be a time of Emergency. Since there was a legal Senate quorum
action was taken immediately.
Cincinnatus:
>Censores have no authority to convene the Senate. Where is their 'imperium'?
Censores don't have it. Show us where it is written. Oh, you own the
website, so you can do whatever you want regardless of the constitution.
Cassius:
Decius Iunius Palladius, Consul, convened the Senate. He had the imperium.
>Cassius:
>Why the Interregnum? First of all, the government of Nova Roma had been
>tottering between being dysfunctional and dissolved for some months. Now,
>with a fight brewing between the Magistrates and the Senate, the
Magistrates against the Censors, and the two Consuls against each other...
Cincinntus: Palladius and I had often spoken on the phone and were working
together, so I thought.
Cassius:
So WE thought, too! Instead, while working with us, you were also sending
letters to Flavia Claudia, trying to get her to sign on to the Impeachment
articles.
>
Cassius:
>Secondly, this Committee thing was not only illegal, it was insane.
>Cincinnatus: Where do you get this idea that a "committee" to discuss what
to do about magistrates not doing their job is illegal?? Where is it
illegal? Nonsense
Cassius:
It is not illegal to "discuss" the conduct of magistrates. I suppose,
strictly speaking, it wasn't ILLEGAL to secretly meet with Citizens and lower
magistrates on ICQ, etc, write up Articles of Impeachment, and try to do away
with your fellow Consul, and both Censors against the will of the Senate. I'd
instead say it's "bad leadership".
Cincinnatus, there were MANY possible ways to solve the Tribes situation,
most of them positive. You could have been a real hero... hailed as an
efficient no-nonsense kind of guy. A decision like: "The Censors have been
completely swamped recently, and have been unable to complete the Tribes and
Centuries. Since this must be done in order for the government of Nova Roma
to proceed legally as per the Constitution, I am appointing a special
Committee to oversee the creation of the Tribes. This extra assistance for
the Censors will allow new Citizens to continue to be processed, etc." would
have done the job. The Tribes would have gotten done under your leadership,
and Decius Iunius and I would have been extremely grateful, since we were
having an awfully hard time of it!
Instead, you had to pursue people on criminal charges, and draw up documents
that would strip them of all offices and humiliate them completely. So what
if they were your friends? So what if such a move would have literally torn
Nova Roma apart? You were getting to Punish the GUILTY!
> Cassius:
Most of the people involved knew EXACTLY what was going on with the tribes,
almost to the very minute. I'd sat down and had a long personal talk with
Marcus
>Audens, (who helped to draw up the charges) explaining exactly what had
>happened with the tribes, when they would be done, HOW they would be done,
>etc. [LATER NOTE: Marcus Audens and I later hashed all this out. Turns out
>that he'd only agreed to an open letter about the tribes, and was not going
>to support the Impeachment.]
Cincinnatus: Like I said there were many ideas being discussed, nobody was
'for' impeachment.
Cassius:
No, of course not. NOBODY was "for" impeachment. Weeks had been spent
creating seven pages of Impeachment Articles in legalese, and writing dozens
of letters to magistrates hoping to gather a groundswell of outrage without
any intent of such things being used. In fact, it was just an exercise in
writing! Yeah, that's the ticket!
Cincinnatus:
But there is no need to think on that now as we all now
know that we were working under a Triumverate (Germanicus,Cassius,Palladius)
the whole time.
Cassius:
At this point, I almost wish that were true. Having that sort of power would
have saved me nights of anguish over being "Impeached" by my friends,
evenings of Patricia being in tears over my being vilified after the years of
effort I've put into creating and maintaining Nova Roma, and all the time I
spent scrabbling around trying to figure out how to save everything from
tearing itself apart.
>
Cassius:
>Same with Sulla, who talked with Q. Fabius all the time. With Cincinnatus
it was even worse... he was *involved* with the work of creating the tribes!
He and Decius and I were now working on the project in tandem... he'd help us
>work on the tribes, and then go to the Comittee to help work on our
>Impeachment. I hope that strikes you as a little odd. Gangalius also knew,
>since he was going to be putting the tribes up on the website, a Germanicus
>has now done.
>Cincinnatus: The tribes are on the website? When was this announced and
where are they? Let's see them.
Cassius:
I thought they were up on the website! Germanicus was forwarding the document
around... maybe he got the flu before getting it up onto the site. Maybe it
IS there and not linked properly. :P Uh, could somebody forward the document
to Cincinnatus already?
>Scaevola:
>> I am open to being persuaded that the course of recent events was not
> primarily about the protection of your personal Dignitas. If it was, there
> is of course nothing more to say.
>
Cassius:
>Had I not been attacked so bitterly and personally, I'd have done what I've
>been doing for two years now and worked to solve things between all
>concerned. I'd have had a long talk with Cincinnatus,
>Cincinnatus: When you called me, you said you were going to "take it all
down". I said "I guess me being Consul doesn't mean anything." You laughed
at me, yep we know where we stand now.
Cassius:
I certainly DID laugh when you mentioned being Consul not meaning anything...
you obviously didn't think it meant anything to Decius Iunius, since you were
working to strip him from the office. I thought it was amazing that your
office should be considered sacred, but Decius Iunius' Consulship should be
totally expendable.
>
Cassius:
>The Interregnum stopped ALL the games going on.
Cincinnatus: Like I said, You own the webpage and you did whatever you
wanted REGARDLESS of the Constitution. That was the Coup de'tat!
Cassius:
Even though people have reviled me for it, I don't regret the Interregnum in
the slightest. Things had just plain gotten too crazy to continue as they
were. Shutting the place down reminded everyone that Nova Roma is a MICRO
nation, not the whole wide world. When things get so bad that people start
bringing their friends up on criminal charges instead of offering them
assistance, things have gone too far. Hopefully, things are on a better basis
now. They HAVE to be! From here on everything will be in the hands of the
elected Senate - and if magistrates decide to start going for each others
throats there'll be few means of stopping it. Nova Roma will simply murder
itself, because it won't have the option of going back to the dealership a
third time for repairs!
>
>Scaevola:
> >My previous email indicated that I would make no use elsewhere of
anything you said to me in an email. This remains true after this go-away
message.
>
>Cassius:
>I did NOT in fact tell you to go away...>Vale,Marcus Cassius Julianus
> Cincinnatus: No, you let Germanicus do it for you.
Cassius:
Um, I thought Germanicus elevated Scaevola to the Senate! Hardly telling
someone to go away...
Cincinnatus:
It is truly sad that the situation was allowed to reach this point, but I
think we have wasted enough time on this. Alae iacta est
Cassius:
Yes, but not much else can be done at this point...
Cincinnatus:
I do have to add that the Cassii were good enough to return my money. I
wonder why they never just sent me what I ordered from the Mecellum.
Cassius:
I've been meaning to ask you about this! What you ordered was T-shirt
transfers and Nova Roma stamps. They were overdue, but I could have sworn I
gave them to you at Roman Days! I thought I handed them to you on the first
day, June 12th, and you put them in the white cardboard box that you left
with us in the Nova Roma tent. Did they for some reason not make it back home
with you? Anyway, your money was refunded because most of it was a donation
to Nova Roma, and after the blowup I couldn't imagine you were still feeling
terribly generous.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
A Theoretical View(The Common Citizen) |
| From: |
BenBorgo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 01:06:39 EDT |
|
In a message dated 7/19/99 7:58:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
<a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=194166216056078116169218163036129208" >raz--------@--------</a> writ-------- Not--------h--------ar--------ot of 'ifs' in this post
Salvete...
<< Will the "actions of the Dictator" (from the Const.) be voted on under the
current
constitution or the proposed constitution? >>
If they are voted on under the laws of the new constitution, that will be
representitive of where we stand in the Republic won't it? We are already
stuck with the new constitution before we can approve of it. This would be
the act of a tyrant...
<<Will the approval be en bloc, the whole bundle, or each action in its own
lights? This question also applies to the laws you have proposed. Will the
Senate and People of Nova Roma be allowed to vote on each one separately?>>
If we are forced to make an all or nothing decision, how many of the Senators
do you think will vote no? Well they would all lose their positions by voting
no, so again do you think that they will hesitate to give approval when their
new promotion is on the line? I seriously doubt that, most likly they will
silently acknowledge the fact that the new constitution and laws are far from
perfect, and that some of them indeed do, possible not purposely, steal the
liberty, and authority from the People, and give it to the Senate and
magistrates. However those same Senators that realize this will tell
themselves and each other, 'Hell, we're Senators, so it's good for us!', and
pass the whole messy, jumble of twisting words without a second thought. And
if the Comitiae were to vote on this all or nothing proposal, what are we to
do? Considering all that has happened, what are our options? With a yes, we'd
be murdering our own liberty...with a no, we'd be throwing the government
back into anarchy. Grouping all the proposed changes into one vote, this
would be the act of a tyrant...
<<Who will be voted to approve or disapprove the actions of the Dictator? In
the current constitution it is "the Senate and Citizens of Nova Roma", under
the proposed constitution it is "subject to final confirmation by the Senate"
alone.>>
And this is the crux of the issue isn't it? Let's see, a Senate, with most of
it's members appointed by Germanicus, voting on Germanicus'
constitution...hmmm, with all due respect to our Senators, I can see them
nodding their heads 'yes' already. But we, the people of Nova Roma, the life
and blood of the Republic, we get to stand idly by under this new
constitution, and watch all the proposed laws and changes go right over our
heads, both the good ones and the bad ones. Is this why the comitiae were
formed? Well I'd just as soon not have the Comitiae and Tribes, if it means
giving so much of the authority back to the Senate, who again is composed of
the Dictator's appointees. Leaving a vote as crucial to the Republic as this
to only a small handful of recently appointed men, and keeping the decision
from the Citizens, this would be the act of a tyrant....
The acceptance and declination of these laws and this constitution is the
hinge pin that will hold Nova Roma toghether, if that is what the Gods wish,
for us to continue on toghether. It may also be the crushing blow, dealt
while we are still writhing wounded upon the ground from the last. Remember
Roma, and how the Republic dissappeared forever, quietly, and under the false
name of a Republic, guided by a princeps. Being guided by a princeps yes-men,
is no better. We must be ruled, but we must do so with those who wish to rule
with us, not over us. The answers given to the questions above will lend a
strong indication of things to come, and where our Republic(for now) is
headed...
It is my very humble opinion, that we follow the Noble Senator Caius Aelius
Ericius' idea, and hand over both copies of the constitution, old and new, to
the Senate and magistrates; they can then revise the old constitution with
some of the better aspects of the new. And the same should go for the
proposed laws...If a vote such as this was done in the Ancient Republic, do
you think it would have worked? Do you not think the People would have
deserted their Senatorial leaders, or even taken to arms against them? It is
the Senate who should be asking for the approval of the People, not the
People asking for that of the Senate...
Read the constitution carefully, and think about it...we await Dictator
Germanicus' answers to the above questions...
Valete,
Gn Tarquinius Caesar
|
| Subject: |
Re: The Prodigal Returns!!! |
| From: |
"Nathan Hicks" moman@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 02:44:05 -0400 |
|
Thanks, Audens... I will stow this message safely away,
and whenever the stately stroll of NR affairs reaches the
point of having accepted my citizenship officially, I'll
pull it out of the archives and read it with renewed
gratitude.
From: <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045232113165042200148200112241225012177026038196249130152150" >jmath669642reng@--------</a> (James Mathe--------br>
>
>Let me be one of the first to welcome you back when you make it
>official. I was very sorry to see you go, and am pleased at your
>return. Your argument for correspondence was intricate if not
>convincing. I thought I undrstood before, but it is all disolving into
>mush in the heat. Maybe when the cooler weather returns (<Grin>)..
That is a problem. My argument was built specifically to run upon
machines operating in temperatures below 70 degrees. I have not
calculated the acceptable heating tolerances for my argument, but
preliminary scenarios do not look promising at 85 plus degrees.
Rusticus
|
| Subject: |
Re: de Rustice |
| From: |
"Nathan Hicks" moman@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 02:47:39 -0400 |
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Raz-------- <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=194166216056078116169218163036129208" >raz--------@--------</a>
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Monday, July 19, 1999 8:28 PM
Subject: [novaroma] de Rustice
>From: Raz-------- <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=194166216056078116169218163036129208" >raz--------@--------</a>
>
>
>I asked the boy (again) last night if he thought of re-applying for Nova Roma
>citizenship. He said yes, if he could rejoin gens Aelia. I told him he had
>caught me in a good mood and to go ahead and do so. Before my mood
>changed.
It's true. He was wearing a mood ring, which was glowing a deep saintly blue.
>We shall see if he gets reaccepted before he does
>his next monumental screw-up.
I've been kicking around a few ideas, but nothing definite as yet...
Rusticus
|
| Subject: |
Re: What to do |
| From: |
"Nathan Hicks" moman@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 03:58:32 -0400 |
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Dreesbach <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114212192056099202169102046248100208071048" >dreesbach@--------</a>
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Monday, July 19, 1999 10:04 PM
Subject: [novaroma] What to do
>From: Daniel Dreesbach <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114212192056099202169102046248100208071048" >dreesbach@--------</a>
>
>I am clueless as to how to operate here.
>
>What are the purposes here?
>
>Posting messages to this list and responding to such is not very
>meaningful to me. Why do we do this? What is expected of everyone?
>How do we operate within it. All everyone seems to do is to argue.
While we pretend to having a functioning government
and pretend to have a realistic and propitious model of
religious institutions, in fact, we aren't much different
from the average bare-knuckled internet hotspot--with
one glaring difference: before every computer terminal,
regardless of whatever frothy-mouthed denunciations,
or wild-eyed doomsday ranting, or childish sputtering
of nonsense that might be spewing out of that terminal,
--and here's the catch---everyone is wearing a TOGA.
Wearer of the Donald Duck bedsheet toga,
Cn. Aelius Rusticus
|
| Subject: |
Re: de Rustice |
| From: |
Kyrene Ariadne kyreneariadne@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 06:57:36 -0400 (EDT) |
|
--- Na-------- Hicks &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=029233014237078135050082190036" &g--------man@--------&l--------&g--------ro--------br>
> >I asked the boy (again) last night if he thought of re-applying for Nova
> Roma
> >citizenship. He said yes, if he could rejoin gens Aelia. I told him he had
> >caught me in a good mood and to go ahead and do so. Before my mood
> >changed.
> It's true. He was wearing a mood ring, which was glowing a deep saintly blue.
Mine's been amber, but I think it's broken....
;)
Valete et khairete,
-Andrea Gladia Kyrinia
===
-=* Kyrene Ariadne/Lolandrea Psikine'Aelanar/Andreia *=-
-=* O'mra AirgeadFaol/Andreia/Andrea Gladia Kyrinia *=-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-=* <a href="http://pagan.drak.net/lolandrea/" target="_top" >http://pagan.drak.net/lolandrea/</a> *=-
-=* ~Amber's Domain~ *=-
-=* ICQ:6663573 Yahoo:KyreneAriadne AIM:KyreneAria *=-
|
| Subject: |
In re constitutionis |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:07:25 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
This is a brief introductory missive to announce that I intend -- despite
my lack of citizenship -- to raise some points about the constitutional
arrangements recently proposed by dictator noster. I do not wish to appear
too hybristic in this and had intended to postpone this until I *had*
received confirmation of my citizenship, but it is clear that dictator
noster wants feedback. As such, there will follow a number of messages on
individual aspects of the constitution under various rubrics which will
hopefully deal with some matters that should be dealt with, in my humble
opinion.
Valete,
M. Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
in re constitutionis: de lictoribus I |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:46:36 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
My first concern is with the lictors who precede magistrates. To a certain
extent, this has been mentioned onlist already, but it bears repeating. The
lictors who preceded certain magistrates were, of course, symbolic of the
power of the magistrate, but they were also something with in my mind was
far more sinister. They were an execution squad. According to precedent,
the job of the lictors was to carry the fasces -- the rods and the axe in a
bundle -- and they carried it for a specific purpose: execution. A
magistrate could dispense summary 'justice' upon someone with the simple
order "Lictor, unbind the fasces", at which point they would beat the
intended victim with the rods (to let them know they were dying, of course)
and then execute them with the axe. While symbolism is always important,
I'm not sure whether NovaRoma really would like to maintain this aspect of
symbolism.
respecte,
Marcus Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
in re constitutionis: de lictoribus II |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:46:45 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
Section III of the constitution provides for a comitia curiata made up of
lictores curiatae, appointed by the collegium pontificum which have a
number of responsibilities including investing magistrates with imperium
and witnessing appointment of priests and priestesses. This strikes me as a
good example of a redundant comitium -- yes, there is the precedent in
ancient Rome, but this was a particularly dangerous one at the time of the
late Republic/early empire. In essence, by that time (especially in the
empire), these lictores were the sole representatives of the peoples'
power, which essentially became little more than ceremonial. I suggest Nova
Roma would do well to make a bold step to correct the mistakes of the past
(i.e. not eliminating at comitium) and simply eliminate this comitia to
prevent it from living up to its precedent.
That said, it strikes me that the investing of someone with imperium should
be done either by the people themselves when they elect a particular
magistrate or, if some ceremonial is required, by the pontifex maximus
(and/or pontifices).
respecte,
Marcus Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
In re constitutionis: de comitiis II |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:47:00 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
It is my humble opinion that the constitution needs to be more specific in
regards to how voting is carried out in the comitia, to whit:
a) are votes private (or as private as our medium allows) or carried out in
the open for all to see?
b) is the principal one man/woman one vote in general or is voting to be
done by centuries or tribes? (i.e. e.g. one century, one vote with the
majority within a century becoming the vote of that century)
Again, this is something that needs to be discussed if only to correct
defects in the precedent we are following ...
respecte,
Marcus Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
In re constitutionis: de comitiis I |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:46:54 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
The Constitution states at IA:
This Constitution shall be the highest legal authority within Nova Roma,
apart from a decree issued by a legally-appointed dictator. It shall
thereafter be followed in legal authority by laws properly voted and passed
by one of the comitia ...
Later we are told that the Comitia centuriata has the power to enact laws
binding on thee whole citizenry (3.B.1), as does the comitia plebis tributa
and the comitia populi tributa.
There is a potential problem here: what precedence to each of these comitia
take? What will happen, e.g., when a law is passed by the comitia
centuriata and a contrary (or 'troublesome') law is passed by one of the
other comitia?
The two comitia tributa also both have jurisdiction to try lawcases not
dealing with citizenship -- what happens if contrary decisions on the same
matter are reached in both?
It strikes me that the two comitia tributae should be made into one,
perhaps with the exception of voting for magistrates. This would create
essentially two popular assemblies for legislative purposes (comitia
centuriata and comitia tributa)and, in terms of precedence, it would
probably be wise to give each the right of intercessio over the other's
legislation (or to put it another way, that legislation passed in the
comitia centuriata would have to be approved by the comitia tributa and
vice versa)
respecte,
Marcus Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
in re constitutionis: de intercessione |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:47:06 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
According to section IV of the constitution, assorted magistrates have the
right of intercessio (veto) over their colleague magistrate or lesser
magistrates. This is a recipe for problems insofar as bonds of amicitiae
between magistrates of various levels might very realistically lead to
vetos of vetos of vetos (e.g. an aedile vetos something from a colleague,
that colleague gets a praetor to overturn the veto, the aedile then gets a
praetor or consul to overturn that veto, etc.).
In my humble opinion, the only magistrates who should have the right of
intercessio are the consuls and the tribunes, as the reps of the senate and
people respectively. A consul's veto should only apply to a fellow consul
and a tribune's to a fellow tribune. It should also be specified in the
constitution whether this right of intercessio extends to legislation
already passed -- e.g. suppose a tribune proposes a law and has it passed
by the comitia tributa; can a tribune subsequently veto that law? When must
an intercessio be imposed in such situations (e.g. before a vote on a
matter?)?
respecte,
Marcus Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 08:31:42 EDT |
|
In a message dated 7/19/1999 9:17:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=173075066165082194184241189100114253071048139" >JusticeCMO@--------</--------; writes:
> Having read all of the posts on this subject to date, it appears to me
that
this boils down to a case of Cassius' word against Cinncinnatus'.
Not quite, I believe that Decius Iunius Palladius would be able to add to
many of the points discussed.
The only thing is that I'm not sure that such discussion is all that
meaningful at this point. There were few who didn't recognize that Nova Roma
was struggling under too many problems to work properly. The Tribes issue was
just the tip of the iceberg.
>Having met
Cassius in person, I believe I know which side of that particlular fence to
land on.
Well, I've met Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus several times, and quite liked the
man! He's a pretty straightforward guy, and basically honorable. We got along
quite well this last Roman Days. Losing his friendship through all this was
more difficult than anything else, except for a bunch of my friends resiging
their Citizenship after all this started.
>However, my ears remain open.....although it does lead me to
question even more strongly those who are lobbying for the reinstatement of
Cincinnatus!!
Even *I* have lobbied for the reinstatement of Cincinnatus, although I must
say I find it difficult to see how it could bring real peace again,
considering the widely opposing points of view held by individuals.
The sad thing about all this is that events just happened too soon. I
shouldn't have been Censor so early on that the post required setting up the
tribes, since that was something I knew nothing about. Cincinnatus might have
made a great Consul later on, when there were many clear-cut rules
established and enough Citizens participating that things could run "by the
book". Instead he was in a position where innovation and creative ability was
still critical. He couldn't adapt to that and instead allowed other people
to push him into a negative course of action that would have been a disaster
no matter HOW it came out.
Everybody lost here, and things aren't ever going to be like they were.
However, that's not necessarily bad. Things weren't all that great! With a
more coherant Constitution, new Laws, and a complete governmental system we
have a much better shot at success than we've had previously.
Vale,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
Note from Dex |
| From: |
Dexippus@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 09:21:45 EDT |
|
Salvete All,
Just a note to let you all know that I've been deleting messages left and
right because I can't keep up with all the discussions and do my job at work.
So if I seem quiet over some things, please don't think it's that I have
nothing to say ('cause you all know I have something to say about everything).
so...with that....there are some things that I have obviously missed...
Sulla...my best wishes are for your father. I hope he has a speedy recovery.
Germanicus...some posts gave me the impression that you are sick. I hope all
is well and not serious
Felix...what the hell happened here?
Kyrinia...related to Felix...again, what happened here?
--Dexippus
In the Shadows of the Gloom
|
| Subject: |
Dictatorship, Constitution, etc. (Was: A Theoretical View) |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 09:40:44 EDT |
|
In a message dated 7/19/1999 10:07:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=023056234037193209048149203140129208071" >BenBorgo@--------</--------; writes:
<< Will the "actions of the Dictator" (from the Const.) be voted on under
the
current
constitution or the proposed constitution? >>
Tarquinius:
If they are voted on under the laws of the new constitution, that will be
representative of where we stand in the Republic won't it? We are already
stuck with the new constitution before we can approve of it. This would be
the act of a tyrant...
Cassius:
As far as I've seen, I believe the new Constitution has been posted so that
Citizens may recommend improvements before it is put into place. Better yet,
many wonderful ideas have been brought up already! We're hardly getting
"stuck" with the changes since there is plenty of time for direct input.
Rusticus:
<<Will the approval be en bloc, the whole bundle, or each action in its own
lights? This question also applies to the laws you have proposed. Will the
Senate and People of Nova Roma be allowed to vote on each one separately?>>
Tarquinius:
If we are forced to make an all or nothing decision, how many of the
Senators
do you think will vote no? Well they would all lose their positions by
voting
no, so again do you think that they will hesitate to give approval when
their
new promotion is on the line? I seriously doubt that, most likly they will
silently acknowledge the fact that the new constitution and laws are far
from
perfect, and that some of them indeed do, possible not purposely, steal the
liberty, and authority from the People, and give it to the Senate and
magistrates. However those same Senators that realize this will tell
themselves and each other, 'Hell, we're Senators, so it's good for us!', and
pass the whole messy, jumble of twisting words without a second thought. And
if the Comitiae were to vote on this all or nothing proposal, what are we to
do? Considering all that has happened, what are our options? With a yes,
we'd
be murdering our own liberty...with a no, we'd be throwing the government
back into anarchy. Grouping all the proposed changes into one vote, this
would be the act of a tyrant...
Cassius:
Hey, that "Tyrant" line is fun, isn't it? I'm betting somebody could run that
into a really biting political satire poem. Rusticus? Dexippus??
As far as the Senate voting only in it's self interest, that's a pretty
convenient way to dismiss some of the people who have been most active in
Nova Roma. Germanicus didn't bring these people into the Senate on a whim...
he appointed the people that the majority of folks wanted to see in the
Senate. But all that aside. I'm a member of the OLD Senate - and how the new
changes are voted on won't affect me one way or the other. Even then I'm
sincerely hoping that we will be allowed to simply ratify the Constitutional
and legal changes once the Citizens have had opportunity to help fine-tune
what has already been presented.
If there are things in the new Constitution and the new Laws that you feel
are wrong, Tarquinius, NOW is the time to speak up and get changes made.
Don't just sit back and go on about Tyrants... and then expect the Senate to
spend the next year or more deadlocked in endless debate over each
individual pissant line of new legislation.
The point to making these changes is that there should *be* changes, not to
have the government strangled by a whole new raft of political nonsense. Let
the people have their voice now - and let the whole updated new Foundation of
Nova Roma be voted in at once.
Rusticus:
<<Who will be voted to approve or disapprove the actions of the Dictator?
In
the current constitution it is "the Senate and Citizens of Nova Roma", under
the proposed constitution it is "subject to final confirmation by the
Senate"
alone.>>
Tarquinius:
And this is the crux of the issue isn't it? Let's see, a Senate, with most
of
it's members appointed by Germanicus, voting on Germanicus'
constitution...hmmm, with all due respect to our Senators, I can see them
nodding their heads 'yes' already. But we, the people of Nova Roma, the life
and blood of the Republic, we get to stand idly by under this new
constitution, and watch all the proposed laws and changes go right over our
heads, both the good ones and the bad ones. Is this why the comitiae were
formed? Well I'd just as soon not have the Comitiae and Tribes, if it means
giving so much of the authority back to the Senate, who again is composed of
the Dictator's appointees. Leaving a vote as crucial to the Republic as this
to only a small handful of recently appointed men, and keeping the decision
from the Citizens, this would be the act of a tyrant....
Cassius:
Again, do as others are already doing, and suggest your changes to the
Constitution and the Laws while they are up for debate before the People.
Allow the changes that have needed to be made, BE made. From what I've seen
so far, there are a lot of private Citizens out there who know more about the
details of Roman law than the Senate will figure out anyway. I've seen more
good stuff from people on this list in the past couple of days than has been
proposed in any time previous. I think that the Constitution has a real
chance of being made into something we all can live with if we work on it NOW
rather than expecting the Senate to dissect it later on.
Tarquinius:
The acceptance and declination of these laws and this constitution is the
hinge pin that will hold Nova Roma toghether, if that is what the Gods wish,
for us to continue on toghether. It may also be the crushing blow, dealt
while we are still writhing wounded upon the ground from the last. Remember
Roma, and how the Republic dissappeared forever, quietly, and under the
false
name of a Republic, guided by a princeps. Being guided by a princeps
yes-men,
is no better. We must be ruled, but we must do so with those who wish to
rule
with us, not over us. The answers given to the questions above will lend a
strong indication of things to come, and where our Republic(for now) is
headed...
Cassius:
In my own opinion, the Constitution being published for all Citizens to
comment on, and ASSIST in improving, is one of the most positive steps that
has ever been taken in Nova Roma. Hardly the act of a Tyrant! The wonderful
thing is that people have been posting incredibly valuable input. The "new"
Constitution will be something that every Citizen can have a hand in
improving... unlike the "old" Constitution, which *was* summarily put into
place without debate.
Tarquinius:
> It is my very humble opinion, that we follow the Noble Senator Caius Aelius
Ericius' idea, and hand over both copies of the constitution, old and new,
to
the Senate and magistrates; they can then revise the old constitution with
some of the better aspects of the new. And the same should go for the
proposed laws...If a vote such as this was done in the Ancient Republic, do
you think it would have worked? Do you not think the People would have
deserted their Senatorial leaders, or even taken to arms against them? It is
the Senate who should be asking for the approval of the People, not the
People asking for that of the Senate...
Cassius:
In my opinion, we should instead clear up any difficulties with the new
Constitution and the new laws NOW, while they're in front of the people, and
then just ratify the damned things and get on with it once that's done.
Again, from what I've seen from the latest posts, some of the best Legal
minds in Nova Roma seem to be *outside* the Senate and magistracies. There is
no reason to lose the input from those folks by expecting the Senate to be
the only body to examine the new material.
Tarquinius:
> Read the constitution carefully, and think about it...we await Dictator
Germanicus' answers to the above questions...
Cassius:
Hope you don't mind my giving input here, Tarquinius. I just couldn't help
bringing up the point that the Dictatorship won't last forever - if you have
specific issues with material in the new Constitution and new Laws, NOW is
the time to bring them up so that any potential problems can be solved. Make
use of the opportunity for direct input while you can - it's a chance you
never had with the former Constitution.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
Re: de Rustice |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 13:52:27 GMT |
|
Salvete Omnes
First of all I want to welcome back Rusticus. I also want to thank Ericius
for accepting him into gens Aelia so he would come back. Last, but most
certainly not least, though I am not a sacerdote of any order officially, I
wish to invoke the blessings of Vesta, Concordia, and Bona Dea on this
assemblage in the hopes of further strengthening the work that has been
done,
Valete
Lucina Iunia Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:22:51 GMT |
|
Salvete Omnes
It's amazing what one misses on a first read-through... for example:
Cincinnatus: This is no ones fault, if you could not keep up with the duties
of the office you should have stepped down and put the Republic first. You
chose to keep the title and position but without doing the job. Meanwhile,
we're all expected to wait on your highness.
Apparently Cincinnatus expects that the rest of the citizens are all wealthy
retirees with nothing else in the way of responsibilities. If such is the
expectation of Cincinnatus, maybe he should do all the work himself since
the rest of us should step aside for the good of the Res Publica... or am I
misreading this? If I am, I invite Cincinnatus to clarify his statements,
since this is just one example of him saying that if one has other
commitments, then it would be best if you do not hold office. I leave it to
you.
Meanwhile, I ask the collegium of the Pontifices to put my sacerdotal
application on hold until this is enlarged upon further. I would not wish my
job, a job that has finally put me on my financial feet and for which I have
worked very hard, to be an obstacle - perceived or real - to my fulfilling
any duties for which I have applied.
Valete
Lucina Iunia Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: What to do |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:58:46 GMT |
|
Salve
Rusticus dixit:
>While we pretend to having a functioning government
>and pretend to have a realistic and propitious model of
>religious institutions, in fact, we aren't much different
>from the average bare-knuckled internet hotspot--with
>one glaring difference: before every computer terminal,
>regardless of whatever frothy-mouthed denunciations,
>or wild-eyed doomsday ranting, or childish sputtering
>of nonsense that might be spewing out of that terminal,
>--and here's the catch---everyone is wearing a TOGA.
>
>
>Wearer of the Donald Duck bedsheet toga,
>Cn. Aelius Rusticus
*grin* I personally wear a lavender paisley satin bedsheet toga that I
stealthfully nicked from Dexippius.
Vale
Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
"Lucius" vergil@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:15:53 -0400 |
|
>From: "Tinnekke Bebout" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a>
>
>Salvete Omnes
>
>It's amazing what one misses on a first read-through... for example:
>
>Cincinnatus: This is no ones fault, if you could not keep up with the
duties
>of the office you should have stepped down and put the Republic first. You
>chose to keep the title and position but without doing the job. Meanwhile,
>we're all expected to wait on your highness.
>
>Apparently Cincinnatus expects that the rest of the citizens are all
wealthy
>retirees with nothing else in the way of responsibilities. If such is the
>expectation of Cincinnatus, maybe he should do all the work himself since
>the rest of us should step aside for the good of the Res Publica... or am I
>misreading this? If I am, I invite Cincinnatus to clarify his statements,
>since this is just one example of him saying that if one has other
>commitments, then it would be best if you do not hold office. I leave it to
>you.>Valete Lucina Iunia Cypria
Simply put, if you do not have the time (and really it doesn't take that
much time) to do the job, then don't take the job. I believe that this is a
reason some citizens who would have been great candidates did not run for
office last year. I did contact many and encoraged them to run but they
informed me that they felt that they would not be able to fullfill the
requirements.
As for being rich, I'm retired on disablity from the Navy. Hardly wealthy,
but I choose not to enter the rat race... Go to work and pay someone else to
raise my kids. But don't think that because I stay home I'm not busy. Those
who have small kids know that is just not possible. I also work with the
LegioXX...But I don't watch TV or go to night clubs (anymore). You must
decide what your priorities are.
Valete, L Equitius
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:38:58 GMT |
|
salve Cincinnatus
Thank you for enlarging further upon your statements. Personally, aside from
my job, I don't have much in the way of commitments. I spend time with my
husband when he isn't on field maneuvers, I play with the cat and weed my
garden. I have time. But I also have a job that gets chaotic from time to
time. (I am senior programmer and database admin) Thus I cannot say that my
time will always include even minimal time for other commitments. There are
nights when my devotions to Vesta are a sleepy chanting of the hymn and some
thank yous and askings of blessings as I prepare to fall into bed...but I
never forget them. There are other nights when it is the full hour of
service. One way or another, She does get Her due. Does this qualify?
Vale
Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: Note from Dex |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@--------) |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:49:09 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Gee, Dexie, I got left out!!!! Just a note that you can send me your
Augury informatin for the newsletter. As I messaged you, I am the new
Eagle Editor. I'll try not to pout too much until you include me in
your thoughts!!! (<Grin>)
Marcus Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Cypria |
| From: |
"Lucius" vergil@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:12:17 -0400 |
|
Ave et Salvete
>From: "Tinnekke Bebout" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a>
>salve Cincinnatus
>
>Thank you for enlarging further upon your statements. Personally, aside
from
>my job, I don't have much in the way of commitments. I spend time with my
>husband when he isn't on field maneuvers, I play with the cat and weed my
>garden. I have time. But I also have a job that gets chaotic from time to
>time. (I am senior programmer and database admin) Thus I cannot say that my
>time will always include even minimal time for other commitments. There are
>nights when my devotions to Vesta are a sleepy chanting of the hymn and
some
>thank yous and askings of blessings as I prepare to fall into bed...but I
>never forget them. There are other nights when it is the full hour of
>service. One way or another, She does get Her due. Does this qualify?
>Vale, Cypria
Sounds good to me. I think this falls under the concessions to the modern
world.
What I was referring to are those who don't do their job for months at a
time or just plain disappear (this happened a few time last year). You have
been through rough times as I recall, but have returned to work. I was glad
to hear that you have recovered from your accident and have found a job you
enjoy. I hope you will continue to enjoy this progress. We are blessed to
have you as a citizen who makes prayers on our behalf.
Valete, Lucius Equitius
|
| Subject: |
Re: in re constitutionis: de lictoribus I |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:30:21 -0400 |
|
Salvete Marce Papiri et alii
>From: Dav--------eadows <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114232192237248190028232203026129208071" >dmeadows@--------</a>
>
>My first concern is with the lictors who precede magistrates.
Yes, I am concerned about lictors too.
To a certain
>power of the magistrate, but they were also something with in my mind was
>far more sinister. They were an execution squad. According to precedent,
>the job of the lictors was to carry the fasces -- the rods and the axe in a
>bundle -- and they carried it for a specific purpose: execution. A
>magistrate could dispense summary 'justice' upon someone with the simple
>order "Lictor, unbind the fasces", at which point they would beat the
>intended victim with the rods (to let them know they were dying, of course)
I may be misinformed, but I believe that the lictors carried axes outside
the pomerium, rods inside. So they could summarily execute non-citizens,
but only beat senseless citizens in good standing :).
>and then execute them with the axe. While symbolism is always important,
>I'm not sure whether NovaRoma really would like to maintain this aspect of
>symbolism.
I happen to like the symbolism. I don't think that lictors often used the
rods or the axes on anyone (cases wherein they were used drew sharp outcry
sometimes -- sorry, my examples are too fuzzy to try to quote here and now).
The fasces and lictors were truly symbolic, I believe. It was a powerful
symbol that we can perpetuate, but not ideally within our constitution,
which, right now, has more pressing matters to address than the symbolism of
magistrates' imperium.
>
>respecte,
>
>Marcus Papirius Justus
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
>
>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
>The Best Place to Buy Movies - Reel.com
><a href=" <a href="http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/reel1" target="_top" >http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/reel1</a> ">Click Here</a>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cypria |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 16:30:24 GMT |
|
Salve Cincinnatus
I appreciate your kind words. It's nice to have clarification on these
matters when feelings are riding so high.
Vale
Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 2 |
| From: |
LSergAust@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:29:24 EDT |
|
Salve,
Tell me if I'm wrong here, Cassius, but doesn't this state clearly that
Cincinnatus did nothing illegal, but just did something you didn't like?
And while you admit freely that the Censores failed to do their jobs (for
whatever list of reasons), you just plain resent anyone else having
pointed it out or trying to hold you responsible.
So, according to your own version of events, this "triumvirate that has
no power" set out to totally abolish Nova Roma, deposed the senior Consul
from his office and cut him off from the government, shut down the Web
site, and then came up with this Interregnum and dictatorship idea to
reestablish the State in a form more to their liking.
Obviously we're all really fortunate that the triumvirate is so powerless!
This whole affair is disgusting and tiresome. Everyone concerned (and
that means all of us) would do well to put it behind them as one does
youthful indiscretions of which one is ashamed but has no power to undo.
You have posted a great deal, much of it damaging to your own side. I
think the facts are plain by now. From here, it begins to sound like that
infantile game of:
Did too!
Did not!
Did too!
Did not!
Can we just have an end to it, please? Nova Roma may be able to go on
under the changes that our "powerless" Dictator has instituted, but not
if this ongoing quarrel remains at the heart of it. It's time to end it
for the sake of the State.
Vale,
L. Sergius Aust.
>Cassius:
>It is not illegal to "discuss" the conduct of magistrates. I suppose,
>strictly speaking, it wasn't ILLEGAL to secretly meet with Citizens and
>lower
>magistrates on ICQ, etc, write up Articles of Impeachment, and try to do
>away
>with your fellow Consul, and both Censors against the will of the Senate.
>I'd
>instead say it's "bad leadership".
>
>Cincinnatus, there were MANY possible ways to solve the Tribes situation,
>most of them positive. You could have been a real hero... hailed as an
>efficient no-nonsense kind of guy. A decision like: "The Censors have been
>completely swamped recently, and have been unable to complete the Tribes and
>Centuries. Since this must be done in order for the government of Nova Roma
>to proceed legally as per the Constitution, I am appointing a special
>Committee to oversee the creation of the Tribes. This extra assistance for
>the Censors will allow new Citizens to continue to be processed, etc." would
>have done the job. The Tribes would have gotten done under your leadership,
>and Decius Iunius and I would have been extremely grateful, since we were
>having an awfully hard time of it!
>
>Instead, you had to pursue people on criminal charges, and draw up documents
>that would strip them of all offices and humiliate them completely. So what
>if they were your friends? So what if such a move would have literally torn
>Nova Roma apart? You were getting to Punish the GUILTY!
certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.
(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)
|
| Subject: |
Re: in re constitutionis: de lictoribus II |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:49:18 -0400 |
|
Salvete Marce Papiri et alii
>From: Dav--------eadows <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114232192237248190028232203026129208071" >dmeadows@--------</a>
>
>
>Section III of the constitution provides for a comitia curiata made up of
>lictores curiatae, appointed by the collegium pontificum which have a
>number of responsibilities including investing magistrates with imperium
>and witnessing appointment of priests and priestesses.
And three comitia besides. Those of us who have been around for a while
(and even newcomers reading the Cassius vs. Cincinnatus thread) know that
none of the comitia could be formed (for whatever reason) thus far. The
Comitia Curiata, while it had its analog in ancient Rome, is a new addition
to Nova Roma. Its addition is, as I have stated in my comments, a move to
greater complexity.
This strikes me as a
>good example of a redundant comitium -- yes, there is the precedent in
>ancient Rome, but this was a particularly dangerous one at the time of the
>late Republic/early empire. In essence, by that time (especially in the
>empire), these lictores were the sole representatives of the peoples'
>power, which essentially became little more than ceremonial.
Thank you for pointing this out. I had no idea that the Comitia Curiata was
used that way in the late republic/early principate. I agree that this is
yet another reason to remove it from the constitution.
I suggest Nova
>Roma would do well to make a bold step to correct the mistakes of the past
>(i.e. not eliminating at comitium) and simply eliminate this comitia to
>prevent it from living up to its precedent.
>
>That said, it strikes me that the investing of someone with imperium should
>be done either by the people themselves when they elect a particular
>magistrate or, if some ceremonial is required, by the pontifex maximus
>(and/or pontifices).
One thing to keep in mind is that the Romans in the republic did not have a
written constitution like the one that we are now debating. They were
following a system that had evolved over centuries, and, in a sense, "had
the time" as well as a reason to invest magistrates with imperium
ceremonially. In our (not-yet-operational) system, we shall not necessarily
have the need or the time to invest them so. Anyone who can read Latin or
English will be able to see that consuls wield imperium, so he/she will, as
you say, invest the magistrate with imperium by electing him/her to the
office of consul.
>
>respecte,
>
>Marcus Papirius Justus
>
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Re: In re constitutionis: de comitiis II |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:52:13 -0400 |
|
Salvete Marce Papiri et alii
>From: Dav--------eadows <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114232192237248190028232203026129208071" >dmeadows@--------</a>
>
>It is my humble opinion that the constitution needs to be more specific in
>regards to how voting is carried out in the comitia, to whit:
>
deletion
I think that the mechanics of voting belong, as Dictator Germanicus has
stated, in the body of laws (in legibus) rather than in the constiution.
That way, mechanics that work poorly can be removed/modified without going
through the torture of constitutional reform.
>respecte,
>
>Marcus Papirius Justus
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Volunteering |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@--------) |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 13:24:56 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Let me try to answer this comment. I have been doing a variety of
volunteering all through my life and there are some basic ideas which
need to be addressed in regard to volunteering.
First there is the fact that only the individual volunteer knows how
much time, ability, resources and skill he or she has to devote to the
task taken on, and secondly there is always the job-related,
family-related and health-related happenstances that will take up
approximately 20% of the allotted time ( over an extended peiod) to be
considered..
There is also the admission that your job cannot be fully or in part
completed (if that is the case), before the required deadline date,
together with a recommendation or two about alternate procedures, to
whoever you report to.
There is then the very old problem of being drawn in over your head, by
the flattery and kind words of friends and colleagues, when a little
thought on the subject would reveal to everyone that you will not have
time to do all the work required.(the "Black Hole of Boy Scout
Volunteering springs to mind!!!!!-just two hours a month--honest!!!!!).
Then there is the consideration and possible realization that the job(s)
that you have undertaken may be much more involved and take more time
that you have available. This will vary from person to person with
their skills and their interest in the topics at hand.
Add to the above that in some cases, "If you wish to get something done
give it to a busy man / woman" Sometimes that is true, but in most
cases it is not, but can be dangerous if you have that kind of
reputation.
There is also the problem in the more comprehensive of tasks of the
requirement to wait until you have all of the information to carry out
the task. When information is "just around the corner" it often happens
that the volunteer waits too long for the information and thus upsets
the schedule.
In all of the above instances, it is the volunteer who must continually
evaluate skill, interest, time, effort, resources, and value to the task
guaranteed, because in most cases the senior to whom the volunteer
reports is not aware of these changes, and will not be until notified.
On the other hand the volunteer will be reluctant to admit a failure to
complete the required task for whatever reason (people are like
that!!!!) and will wait too long for the situation to get better.
Lastly there is the difference between," I can't and I don't wanna". On
a longtime or short term basis, this means that the volunteer must make
some tough choices, at times, about doing fun things or doing what he /
she has pledged to do.
All the above situations have occurred here in NR, and to the extent
that they were explained and understood by all parties is still with the
jury, but that is the way that all such similar situations end up when
all principles are overworked and under extreme pressure of their peers,
who only wish to criticize and not take part in the responsibility of
the work to be done. And that is another pitfall of volunteering, is
that everyone will expect you to do your job, without reason or excuse
while they (who are not involved) snipe away at a distance. If you
don't like that idea, then don't volunteer!!!.
How to not fall into that situation. Below are some rules which I have
put together for my own use. They have worked well for me and I hope
they may be of some use to you:
----Never take more than one job at a time (Since my retirement I have
more liesure time and am involved in several organizations, but always
with only one position in each);
----If you find that you must do so temporarly immediately recruit a
number of friends and or aquaintances to twice the number you will
actually need to keep on track;
----Carefully compute the hours per month that you can allot to the
volunteer task, and immediately reduce that by 20-30% for those
emergencies that are bound to come;
----Keep in detailed communication with your senior, listing your
successes, failures, problems , ideas, and breakthroughs. Make sure
that this person understands you and what you have said;
----Be very wary of flattering appointments which carry with them a
significant increase in work, without re-evaluating your available time,
resources, and ability;
----Make the decision to stay in for the long run. stay with your
responsibilities, until such time as you understand that your words or
services are no longer required, and thn address your feelings to your
senior or others that you trust for discussion or advice. Finally you
must make the decision to stay or leave upon your own perceptions;
I wish to state for the record that I refer to no specific person or
organiation in Nova Roma in the above. I also state freely that to have
an intelligent set of rules is not always a guarrantee that they will be
used wisely.
----My last comment, I take from the by-laws of my re-enactment
regiment, which I think is the best of all of the above. Substitute the
word "Communication" for the word "Attendance" and I think that the note
says it all:
"The three watchwords of this regiment to all herein assigned are
Attendance, Attendance, and Attendance. With Attendance all problems
may be solved, without Attendance, not even the very least attempt at
solving any problem may be endeavored."
Salve, My Dear Lucina Iunia Cypria
Respectfully;
Marcus Minucius Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Devotions |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@--------) |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 13:30:12 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Salve, Cypria;
I would most respectfully advance that if you think that you have given
to you and yours what is their due, then that is what really needs to be
satisfied, and no-one else may gainsay you.
Marcus Minucius Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Re: Devotions |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:48:25 GMT |
|
Salve Audens
Thank you for replying. I trust my own feelings as it comes to my private
devotions... but since I have applied for sacerdotal office, I want to be
sure that the pontifices can be certain I make every effort to keep my
obligations.
Vale
Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: CMM de novo publico iure |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:26:57 -0400 |
|
Salvete Luci Sergi et alii
-
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>
>Salvete Merullus and Germanicus,
Wow. I don't know that I'm worthy of being addressed in the same line with
Germanicus like that.
>
>Just a point of clarification, please. According to Colleen McCullough's
>glossaries, curule magistrates were those holding imperium. Curule
>aediles were senior magistrates, holding imperium, while plebian aediles
>were not and did not.
I wouldn't refer to any aediles as "senior" magistrates, since the office of
aedile was one point of entry into the cursus honorum (others-- more common,
the office of quaestor, or -- tribunate). I think of praetores, censores
and consules as "senior".
For a glimpse at the office of aedile in the republican period of ancient
Rome, I quote a sentence from Plutarch's bio of Marius:
"After his tribuneship, he was candidate for the office of chief aedile;
there being two orders of them, one the curules, from the stool with crooked
feet on which they sat when they performed their duty; the other and
inferior, called aediles of the people. "
So there were curule and plebeian aediles, the former having more power than
the latter.
This fact was reflected in the old constitution of Nova Roma, which called
for two curule aediles who were to wield imperium; and two plebeian
aediles, who did not wield imperium.
What is imperium? Imperium has many meanings (in some contexts it can be
translated as "sovereignty" or even "empire"), but in this case, I believe
that it is the power to implement the law. Germanicus has defined it as the
power to interpret the law, which is nearly the same thing.
By either definition, does it make sense to have aediles without imperium
able to impose a veto, or intercessio, against aediles who have imperium? I
say that it does not make sense.
What are the choices? I identify two (there may of course be more):
1. Re-write the relevant paragraph doing away with the distinction between
curule and plebeian aediles. This is the easiest thing to do now, and will
allow election of four aediles by one assembly annually. Easy peasy. But
not necessarily desirable, because it will be a less accurate, or less Roman
if you will, hierarchy of magistrates, and, because it removes another
function of the patrician order (curule aediles could be of either class,
patrician or plebeian, both in ancient Rome and in the old constitution, but
the fact that the two plebeian aediles were to be plebeian would have
encouraged patricians, in my view, to run for the office of curule aedile).
2. Re-write the relevant paragraph borrowing from the old constitution --
give the curule aediles imperium, and, I recommend, intercessio. But don't
give the plebeian aediles either of those powers. I am not making an attack
on plebeians here; I am trying to propose constitutional language that
makes sense and is conducive to compliance and equity.
>
>Is this in accord with others' understanding? Is this how we are using
>"curule" in Nova Roma?
As it stands, the constitution uses curule, as far as I can tell, only to
describe the curule aediles. And its application there makes no sense to me
(see above).
>
>Admittedly, Ms. McCullough may not be the world's foremost scholar on
>Rome, but she's where much of my skimpy knowledge of the intricacies of
>Roman government came from.
Her books seemed incredibly well researched to me. I'm not as well-read as
Fabius, or perhaps Callidus and some others here; maybe some of those
people are able to detect inaccuracies in her definitions. The only
mistakes that I could find in her work were a couple of Latin grammar
mistakes that could have been simple typo's.
>
>Thanks,
>
>L. Sergius Aust.
>
>
>aut amat aut odit mulier: nihil est tertium.
>
>(A woman either loves or hates: there is no third possibility.)
>
> Publilius Syrus
>
Tertium semper quod est neutrum
There's always a third possibility, that is, neither.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cypria Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 14:41:00 -0400 |
|
Salvete Lucina Iunia et alii
Please don't do that. If we get caught up in the search for blame, or even
for justice, at this point, we are not going to have any Nova Roma at all.
And then how will there ever be justice?
Nova Roma needs pontifices, just like it needs senators, as much now (maybe
more) as ever. I realize that I don't hold any office, and I'm not
pretending to have any auctoritas by saying this to a Iunia, who was an
aedile at that, but I think that the loss of your participation, and of
others, would stop this whole process short. All the good things that we
see in Nova Roma's future will then never be.
It is only my opinion, based on what you have posted. I don't pretend to
know your mind or your circumstances. I wish you the best.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Tinnekke Bebout" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a>
>
>Meanwhile, I ask the collegium of the Pontifices to put my sacerdotal
>application on hold until this is enlarged upon further. I would not wish
my
>job, a job that has finally put me on my financial feet and for which I
have
>worked very hard, to be an obstacle - perceived or real - to my fulfilling
>any duties for which I have applied.
>
>Valete
>
>Lucina Iunia Cypria
>
>
>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
>Create a list for FRIENDS & FAMILY...
><a href="http://www.onelist.com" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com</a>
>...and you can WIN $100 to Amazon.com. See homepage for details.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Subject: |
Re: Future??? |
| From: |
"Keith Seddon" K.H.S@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:19:33 +0100 |
|
Thank you Gaius Drusus Domitianus for a thoughtful and interesting posting.
You wrote:
> Once we have the entire infrastructure of Nova Roma in place that
> allows government to work efficiently what then? If we look beyond the
> wall the entire purpose of forming this government in the first place is
> to further our desires - expansion of the Religio Romana, archeological
> studies, Latin studies, reenactment, etc, etc. etc. What definitive
> course of action is Nova Roma to take then???
I am developing plans for a Stoic School (Collegium Stoicorum), which would
aim to help individuals progress towards eudaimonia, the vita beata, or the
happy life.
If there is interest in this, I will set about preparing a webpage (not
necessarily on the NR site, tho a link from the NR site would be something
to aim for), and starting a onelist forum for general communication.
If anyone needs to know more in order to decide whether they would be
interested, let me know.
Live with honour,
L. Gellius Severus
Stoic Philosopher
|
| Subject: |
CMM de decreto sub nomine DECRETUM RATIO COMITIA CURIATA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 16:39:17 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
First of all, I think that the title should be something like Decretum de
Rationi Comitiorum Curiatorum.
More importantly, I think that this decree should not be made, and that said
assembly, Curiata, be stricken from your constitution, for reasons upon
which I touched in my previous message, and for others pointed out by M
Papirius Iustus.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
CMM de lege sub nomine LEX GERMANIA CENTURIATA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:05:42 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
First, I think that the title should be different. Here are some
suggestions:
Lex Vedia de Centuriatis Comitiis
Lex Vedia Centuriatorum Comitiorum
Lex Vedia Comitiorum Centuriatorum
Lex Germanica de Centuriatis Comitiis
Now, more importantly:
This is a good law. I think that it is eminently sensible to put the
details of the formation of the assembly outside the constitution into this
separate law, that can be more easily changed/replaced later if it doesn't
work well.
Some suggestions and questions:
- Paragraph D says
"D. The entire list of citizens shall be divided as evenly as possible
into five classes, based on their accumulated points from the above
schedule, with those with higher point totals being enrolled in Class I and
those with the lowest point totally being enrolled in Class V."
Would it not spare the censores some work if you established within this law
point ranges and associated them with the classes, then let the citizens
fall into the classes as they may? I realize that this may result in some
rather asymmetrical class assignments (bottom-heavy or top-heavy), but isn't
easing the workload of the censores a priority now?
- I was surprised not to see in this law more "beef" on the mechanics of
voting. Did you by any chance review my proposal on voting mechanics that I
sent twice to the old senate? I think that the nuts-and-bolts will have to
be addressed and it is better to do so sooner than later. A cumbersome
aspect of that proposal was the role of speakers, which you have (wisely in
my opinion) removed in the New Order. Another aspect, that maybe you could
fit into this law (or elsewhere) would be protection against fraudulent
vote-counting. My proposal called for a variety of ballots (for both
printed and electronic transmission) to be made available to the assembly
constituents. To protect against fraud, the magistrate who counts the votes
(rogator in your New Order) should, within a specific timeframe after the
assembly's vote, return the ballot to the voter and retain a copy of it.
The copies of the ballots would not be made available to anyone for any
reason except one -- inquiries into ballot manipulation. Let me know if you
would like me to dig up my old proposal, or come up with something new in
this regard.
- I also would be reassured to see more specifics of the means to be used
to assign points and tabulate citizens in the centuries. Spreadsheets?
Databases? Which ones? This isn't the constitution, and I think that you
needn't hesitate to offer specific instructions here. It will make the work
of the censors easier to undertake, and we shall have more likelihood of
success if there is less invention left until later.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
CMM de lege sub nomine LEX VEDIA RATIO COMITIA PLEBIS TRIBUTA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:58:34 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
How about calling this one Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis
Tributorum?
This too is a good law.
How about increasing the length of the trinundium called for in paragraph B?
I like three market days, or even just two market days, a lot more than
three days period.
Again, how about including some provision guarding against ballot
manipulation, such as having rogatores retain a copy of ballots and send
originals back to voters?
Where to put specific guidelines on the censors' work of tabulating citizens
in the tribes, such as software to be used for this purpose, archival
procedure, et cetera?
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
CMM de lege sub nomine LEX VEDIA RATIO COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 18:03:30 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
How about calling this one Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Populi
Tributorum?
This too is a good law.
How about increasing the length of the trinundium called for in paragraph B?
I like three market days, or even just two market days, a lot more than
three days period.
It looks like there is a typo in paragraph II: "Leges satura, which are
laws which deal with more than one topic, may not be enacted by the comitia
plebis tributa." Plebis should be replaced by populi.
Again, how about including some provision guarding against ballot
manipulation, such as having rogatores retain a copy of ballots and send
originals back to voters?
Where to put specific guidelines on the censors' work of tabulating citizens
in the tribes, such as software to be used for this purpose, archival
procedure, et cetera?
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
in re constitutionis: de fascibus |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:25:03 -0400 |
|
Salvete!
Grant me the indulgence of a 'postsententiam':
Scripsit Gaius Marius Merullus:
I may be misinformed, but I believe that the lictors carried axes outside
the pomerium, rods inside. So they could summarily execute non-citizens,
but only beat senseless citizens in good standing :).
Respondeo:
No, you are well-informed (better than most, I'd say). However it should be
noted that beatings with the rods was often fatal (see e.g. Cicero, Verr.
2.3.29.70, among other places)
Et scripsit:
I happen to like the symbolism. I don't think that lictors often used the
rods or the axes on anyone (cases wherein they were used drew sharp outcry
sometimes -- sorry, my examples are too fuzzy to try to quote here and now).
The fasces and lictors were truly symbolic, I believe. It was a powerful
symbol that we can perpetuate, but not ideally within our constitution,
which, right now, has more pressing matters to address than the symbolism of
magistrates' imperium.
Respondeo:
I'm not sure we can judge how often they were used in all honesty; the
sorts of people who would be victims of such tools were not the sorts our
historians tended to write about. In any event, if fasces are to have their
symbolic value, I trust magistrates will order the lictors to bow them in
the presence of those whom they were traditionally bowed for (e.g. Vestals,
other magistrates with imperium, the populus at an assembly.
For anyone interested in the symbolism of the fasces (as well as some
remarks about the triumph, see A.J. Marshall, "Symbols and Showmanship in
Roman Public Life: The Fasces" *Phoenix* 38 (1984), 120-141.
Valete!
MPJ
|
| Subject: |
MMSM de iure publica nova (long) |
| From: |
Mike Macnair MikeMacnair@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:28:48 -0400 |
|
Salvete omnes,
Follows some proposals for amendment of Germanicus' new draft Constitution,
hopefully not too late.
1. I. A. Legal precedence, and I. C. amendment. I would propose:
"A. This Constitution shall be the basic authority for all decision-making
within Nova Roma and shall limit the authority of all magistrates and
bodies, and all Leges passed by the Comitia, Decreta of the Collegia of
Pontiffs and Augurs, magistral Edicts and senatus consulta shall be subject
to it except as provided by the following two provisos:
1. The Decreta of a Dictator appointed under this Constitution may
override its provisions for the duration of the Dictator's office, in so
far as they are expressed to do so.
2. This Constitution may be amended by a Lex passed by the Comitia
Centuriata and approved by two thirds of all those entitled to vote in the
Senate."
What this would change:
1. The present draft sets up a conflict between a) A, makes Leges subject
to the Constitution, C. allows Leges to amend the Constitution. This puts
the two powers together and explicitly demarcates them.
2. It is messy to state the hierarchy of other rules here: the limits on
other powers to legislate should be stated in the grant of the powers, i.e.
in the relevant sections. (this would require consequential amendments to
these sections) Otherwise, e.g., the subject limits of the powers (e.g. of
the collegia) get lost in the general hierarchy.
3. The powers of a Dictator are temporary in nature. Even Sulla and Caesar,
as Dictators, proposed Leges to the Comitia for their permanent measures!
Hence the formulation in proviso 2.
4. This would reserve the amending power to the Comitia Centuriata, which
would be consistent with Roman practice.
2. Praetors (in several places)
Praetors, i.e. what we are now calling urban praetors, should simply be
called Praetors.
Reasons:
1. Ancient Roma had (before Sulla's reforms) an (1) Urban Praetor who dealt
with litigation only between two citizens, and a (1) Peregrine Praetor who
dealt with litigation involving foreigners. Both were "Praetors"; this was
merely a division of work.
2. The old Constitution needed to distinguish "Urban" Praetors from
provincial Governors. The new version calls provincial governors
propraetors, so that the need to retain "Urban" is gone.
3. This also gets rid of "Praetor Urbanis" which is false Latin (UrbanUs)
and "Praetores Urbanii" which is even worse (UrbanI)
3. II. A. 1 and 3. Paterfamilias and age. I would propose:
"1. Any person who is sui juris by the municipal laws of his or her
domicile may apply for citizenship.
2. A person who is not sui juris by the municipal laws of his or her
domicile may, with the written permission of their parent or legal guardian
by the relevant municipal law, petition the pater or mater-familias of a
Nova Roma gens for admission to that gens. [Then as existing text]
3. [Existing 2.]"
What this changes and why:
1. The age of 15 is replaced by the legal age of majority in the applicable
local jurisdiction. "sui juris", means in roman and modern law, legally
independent. "municipal law" is the international lawyers' word for state
or national law. "Domicile" means e.g. that an English minor temporarily
resident in France is subject to English, not French, law in relation to
age of majority.
This amendment would protects NR from legal risk by adapting our
citizenship rules to the law of the relevant jurisdiction.
I am still trying to work out how some of the other changes alter the
previous Constitution. In general, contrary to some comments, there is some
streamlining, but I wonder whether some things which should be in (like,
e.g., rules for exclusion from citizenship!) have got dropped.
Valete,
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister
|
| Subject: |
CMM de LEGE VEDIA APPARITORIA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:31:17 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
I strongly urge you to consider scrapping this one.
I see no need for a decuria lictorum of any kind at this time, or in the
forseeable future. If you organize an event, and I can get to it, sure,
I'll carry an ax in front of you. I had the perfect sort of ax for that
too, but it became property of the Boston University police a few years
ago...
But we don't need to formalize this stuff, not here and now. Let's not take
our eyes off the ball. It's enough in the constitution to give the
magistrates the authority to appoint assistants (whatever the titles -
you've chosen some good ones).
I certainly see the value of assistants in getting things done; what is the
point, however, of having a decuria, no several decuriae, to embody these
assistants collectively and formally? Are we going to have something like
trade-unions for Nova Roman public servants? Collective bargaining for
assensi?
Someday, it may be..may...be.. a good idea. Gods get us to that problem!
But for now, quem ad causam?
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
CMM de lege sub nomine LEX VEDIA RATIO COMITIA CENTURIATA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 17:48:56 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
Oops! Here is some of the beef that I said was missing from the other law
that you posted about the centuriate assembly. And yes, believe it or not,
I read all the proposed laws before I started to write these comments.
Still, some comments:
- Name suggestion: how about Lex Vedia de Ratione Centuriatorum
Comitiorum?
- The voting mechanics issues that I mention in the other post could be
addressed in this law.
- The specifics on the censors' work tabulating the centuries belong to the
other law on the centuriate assembly.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Re: CMM de novo publico iure |
| From: |
Mike Macnair MikeMacnair@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:29:52 -0400 |
|
L. Sergius Aust. wrote:
>Just a point of clarification, please. According to Colleen McCullough's
>glossaries, curule magistrates were those holding imperium. Curule
>aediles were senior magistrates, holding imperium, while plebian aediles
>were not and did not.
Also according to my textbooks on roman law. Curule Aediles were
magistrates with imperium, with responsibility for market regulation,
public buildings, etc. They had judicial powers in relation to consumer
protection, and the Aedilician Edicts are the origin of much modern sale of
goods law. Plebeian Aediles were originally assistants to the Tribunes, but
in the late Republic and early empire got drawn into the administrative
side of the Curule Aediles' work.
MM SM
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate the Interregnum and all of it |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:21:49 -0400 |
|
Salvete Luci Sergi et alii
I hold a slightly differing view (I know, I know, me and my differing view
can go sese paedicare, but I'll say it anyway :)):
I may never tire of hearing the people involved (Iulianus, Palladius,
Cincinnatus, Claudia et alii) tell their sides of the story. When I read
that interregnum message....well, I was upset, to put it mildly. While no
amount of explanation will ever undo its occurrence, I always want the
explanation anyway, because the event was so...damaging, unfair,
disillusioning, ridiculous? (warning -- I'm about to rant a little -- It
made me realize how ridiculous I have been -- translating bits and pieces of
the constitution most every week, reading examples of Cicero's usage of
various terms to decide whether they fit, corresponding with Scaevola for
guidance and correction, while too looking cautiously for insight into
Religio Romana, something in which I lack a personal tradition and
knowledge -- then "poof!" {oops, bad choice of words I guess} it's all out
the window like the contents of a matella -- an acquaintance of my friend is
passionately interested in things Roman and has been telling my friend that
he is anxious to meet me and find out about this Nova Roma thing -- what am
I supposed to tell this guy? I'll tell him something, but how will it, our
recent history, no matter how delicately summarized and re-told, play on the
ears of a new person?) -- this pretty much concludes the ranting
And yet, I cannot judge Iulianus, Palladius, Cincinnatus, Claudia et alii.
They were here before me and put more into this organization than I did.
Too, I cannot read their minds to know their intentions (hell, I have never
seen a single one of them, so cannot even read their body language and
facial expression for clues as to whether any of them is just plain lying --
I cannot deny that possibility, since the sum of their stories adds up to
deception and total failure at collective cooperation). Who am I? Who are
you? We are citizens and deserve fairness, but we're not qualified to judge
what happened, save to the extent of forming our own opinions on the matter.
And even that is hard to do amidst all the "did not! did too!" as you
pointed out.
Someday, if this ship ever sails and doesn't sink before it's out of the
harbor, there may be a way and a justification for a formal process to sort
out what happened. Maybe not.
Certainly, there is no way to do that, or even a justification for calling
for it, right now. We have the dictatorship and the legal reform calling to
us. Those two things to me make up a chance at a second beginning. I am in
no way certain that the chance will achieve success and ask the
Religio-enabled among us to pray for success.
I cannot, however, tire of the voluntary lustration. I'll always wonder how
such a seemingly well-conceived thing as Nova Roma, founded and joined by
such seemingly talented and well-meaning people, could reach the point of
absurdity that the interregnum was.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>
>Salve,
>
>Tell me if I'm wrong here, Cassius, but doesn't this state clearly that
>Cincinnatus did nothing illegal, but just did something you didn't like?
>
>This whole affair is disgusting and tiresome. Everyone concerned (and
>that means all of us) would do well to put it behind them as one does
>youthful indiscretions of which one is ashamed but has no power to undo.
>
>You have posted a great deal, much of it damaging to your own side. I
>think the facts are plain by now. From here, it begins to sound like that
>infantile game of:
>
>Did too!
>
>Did not!
>
>Did too!
>
>Did not!
>
>Can we just have an end to it, please? Nova Roma may be able to go on
>under the changes that our "powerless" Dictator has instituted, but not
>if this ongoing quarrel remains at the heart of it. It's time to end it
>for the sake of the State.
>
>Vale,
>
>L. Sergius Aust.
>
|
| Subject: |
CMM de LEGE VEDIA SENATORIA |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:11:00 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
I like this law. It has seemed to me for months that magistrates should at
the least be sitting in on the senate's deliberations, or even be
full-fledged senators. It was one of the best decisions made by the old
senate to do just that just before the interregnum.
Anyway, all I see to fix here is the typo: ubanis should be urbanus.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
In re constitutionis: de comitiis I |
| From: |
Mike Macnair MikeMacnair@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:29:55 -0400 |
|
Salvete omnes!
M. Papirius Justus writes:
>It strikes me that the two comitia tributae should be made into one,
>perhaps with the exception of voting for magistrates. This would create
>essentially two popular assemblies for legislative purposes (comitia
>centuriata and comitia tributa)and, in terms of precedence, it would
>probably be wise to give each the right of intercessio over the other's
>legislation (or to put it another way, that legislation passed in the
>comitia centuriata would have to be approved by the comitia tributa and
>vice versa)
This relates to another issue - "supremacy" of the Constitution and
constitutional amendments. Who decides whether a lex or edict is
inconsistent with the Constitution? What amending mechanism?
Roma Antiqua, at least in the later Republic (which is what we know much
about) passed constitutional measures through the Comitia Centuriata, and
private law measures through the Concilium Plebis. The Comitia Tributa met
only for elections. The Comitia Centuriata is set up so as to give more
weight to experience and activity. Why not follow Roma Antiqua and restrict
constitutional amendments to C. Centuriata?
The right of provocatio (or appeal to the people) was also to Comitia
Centuriata. That makes C. Centuriata the final appeal court. So even if
they can't amend the Constitution, they can decide what it means ...
Valete,
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister
|
| Subject: |
In re constitutionis: responsum |
| From: |
David Meadows dmeadows@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:26:59 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
Gaius Marius Merullus scripsit:
One thing to keep in mind is that the Romans in the republic did not have a
written constitution like the one that we are now debating. They were
following a system that had evolved over centuries, and, in a sense, "had
the time" as well as a reason to invest magistrates with imperium
ceremonially. In our (not-yet-operational) system, we shall not necessarily
have the need or the time to invest them so. Anyone who can read Latin or
English will be able to see that consuls wield imperium, so he/she will, as
you say, invest the magistrate with imperium by electing him/her to the
office of consul.
Respondeo:
If I may be so bold as to once again beg the indulgence of the cives Novae
Romae, GMM has made a very important point. The Roman 'constitution' which
we are trying to adapt was the product of many centuries and, it may be
added, was also the product of the Roman tendency to not eliminate
something once it existed (this was a characteristic both of institutions
and laws). This is why, e.g., there were so many comitia in ancient Rome
(and also why women in the urban environment of the late Republic were
still subject to tutores mulierum and required auctoritas tutoris for
transactions which were of more importance in a rural setting). Where the
sensible (from a democratic point of view) thing to do would have been to
make all the comitia into a single unit, we have to realize that the Romans
really weren't that interested in democracy. The ancient comitia structure
was designed to ensure that the upper classes would always dominate -- for
better or worse. Before any written constitution is voted on, I think it
would be wise to consider whether we want Nova Roma to be a democracy for
all or whether we want it to be something more oligarchical. In our desire
to emulate the best of ancient Rome, there is an officium for us, I
honestly believe, to recognize and make all attempts to correct the
mistakes/difficulties inherent in the ancient constitution and which
ultimately contributed to Rome becoming not just an oligarchy, but a
monarchy in everything but name. This is why it is important to decide
whether we do want the multitude of comitia, or whether it would be more
practical/pragmatic to simply have a comitia tributa. Barring that, if
there is a desire for a comitia centuriata (one of the chief tools of
domination of the upper classes in ancient times) we would be well advised
to specify within the constitution how voting is to take place. It is best
to foresee implications of a constitution *before* it has been ratified
than hope for favourable juristic interpretation afterwards ... the
experience of my own country (Canada) and the US both suggest that
foresight works better than afterthoughts.
respecte,
M. Papirius Justus
|
| Subject: |
in re constitutionis: de intercessione |
| From: |
Mike Macnair MikeMacnair@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:29:57 -0400 |
|
Salvete omnes,
I copy below as an addition to the discussion on the veto Michael
Crawford's translation of the Lex Irnitana, c. 27, from 76 Journal of Roman
Studies 174 at 184.
The Lex Irnitana is a late 1st century AD municipal constitution from
Spain. Since the constitution was generally modelled on Rome, the provision
on intercessio (veto) reflects roman understandings of that period. The
"duumvirs" are consuls and praetors rolled into one, common in municipal
constitutions. There is no equivalent to the Tribunes.
The interesting points are (1) the veto is to be used without a citizen's
application only against one's colleague in office (Duumvir against
duumvir, aedile against aedile, etc). Other vetos depend on application by
a citizen. (2) the veto must be used within a fixed period of time. (3) It
may only be used once in relation to any case (i.e. transaction).
"<Ch. 27>
Rubric. Concerning intercession amongst duumviri and aediles and quaestors.
Whoever are duumviri or aediles or quaestors of that municipium, those
duumviri are to have the right and power of interceding against each other,
and when anyone appeals to one or other or both of them from one or more
aediles or from one or more quaestors, likewise the aediles against each
other, provided that the intercession takes place within three days from
when the appeal has been made and from when intercession is possible, and
provided that none of them is appealed to more than once in the same case;
and no one is to do anything contrary to these rules when intercession has
taken place"
Valete,
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister
|
| Subject: |
CMM de LEGE VEDIA VIGINTISEXVIRORUM |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:16:35 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
All the functions listed in this law are useful. I think that they can be
assigned by the consuls to praetors, aediles and quaestors who then will
have multiple titles.
Yes, I'm proposing that our magistrates continue to wear a lot of hats.
Because there is nothing even close to a pool of active qualified people to
fill all the offices that the constitution and package of laws are creating.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Re: What to Wear (Was What To Do) |
| From: |
"Nicolaus Moravius" n_moravius@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:38:00 PDT |
|
Quiritibus, plurimam salutem!
Scripsit Rusticus:
>While we pretend to having a functioning government
>and pretend to have a realistic and propitious model of
>religious institutions, in fact, we aren't much different
>from the average bare-knuckled internet hotspot--with
>one glaring difference: before every computer terminal,
>regardless of whatever frothy-mouthed denunciations,
>or wild-eyed doomsday ranting, or childish sputtering
>of nonsense that might be spewing out of that terminal,
>--and here's the catch---everyone is wearing a TOGA.
>
>
>Wearer of the Donald Duck bedsheet toga,
>Cn. Aelius Rusticus
- et sic Cypria:
>*grin* I personally wear a lavender paisley satin bedsheet toga that I
>stealthfully nicked from Dexippius.
>
>Vale
>
>Cypria
- It is time, O Cives, that someone spoke out against the appallingly
un-Roman dress-sense of our young people, and of matrones who ought to know
better.
Imprimis, C. Aelius Rusticus' Donald Duck bedsheet toga is typical of the
young man's lack of gravitas and respect for the mos maiorum that made our
micronation great. I urge the long-suffering Ericius, as his paterfamilias,
to take the lad firmly into his potestas.
Et item, as for L. Iunia Cypria's shameless admission that she wears male
attire stolen from an Augur (O sic impudentias!), I am almost speechless. No
wonder our society is in near-chaos.
I therefore, Citizens, propose to set an example. At this very moment, I am
decked with the utmost dignitas in my black leather toga virilis (cut from a
double bedsheet, manly and serviceable in all weathers), with lati clavi in
chrome studs and chain links. It can also be worn, Cato-fashion, without the
tunica.
Disdaining such sartorial minimalist overstatements however, as unbecoming
even a conservative like myself in these modern times, I also wear a blue
denim tunica with orange hem- and side-stitching, strengthened with copper
rivets. My feet are shod with black leather caligae, not over-studded in
chrome, to complement the toga.
The whole, una simul is virile, simple, dignified, and hard-wearing - and
looks stunning when topped off with a pair of shades. I urge all
right-thinking (male) citizens to follow my example and put an end to
sartorial decadence once and for all.
Vestite bene in dignitate Romanum,
Vado Arbiter.
|
| Subject: |
CMM de Senatus de Ratione Senatu Consulto |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:21:46 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
My only suggestion is to replace pro Ratio with de Ratione in the title of
this Senatus consultum.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Ludi Apollinares - winners into the camenaeum |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 16:04:57 -0400 |
|
Salvete Dictator Flavi Vedi et alii
If anyone is adding to the camenaeum area of the website anytime soon,
perhaps a piece could be added about the just-concluded Ludi Apollinares.
(basic draft of the text -- "organized by A Gryllus Graecus Aedilis Plebis
in honor of Apollo MMDCCLII ab urbe condita, winners "Veritas Apollonis"
(Apollo's truth), Appius Claudius Lucentius Nigellus and "Three
devotionals", Pythia" -- the text of the pieces probably should be quoted in
full).
Actually, if we're not using much of our allocated space for this site,
maybe all the entries could be recorded in the camenaeum? I think that the
contest was a good idea and it went off rather well. It would be nice to
make a record of this success.
What do you think?
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Cypria Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 1 |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" tinnekke@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:14:30 GMT |
|
Salve Merullus
I have been satisfied with Cincinnatus's response to my query. I respect his
answer and do hope to serve Nova Roma once again. There should be no
question that I have the time and desire to fulfill the requirements of the
position for which I have applied and hope to hear some response soon.
In the service of the Senate and the People of Nova Roma,
Lucina Iunia Cypria
|
| Subject: |
Re: Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate, Part 2 |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 20:32:37 EDT |
|
In a message dated 7/20/1999 9:36:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------; writes:
Sergius:
> Tell me if I'm wrong here, Cassius, but doesn't this state clearly that
Cincinnatus did nothing illegal, but just did something you didn't like?
Much in the same way I did nothing illegal, but just did something *you*
didn't like. ;)
To be perfectly honest, I'm not certain where bad judgment here blends into
illegality. Cincinnatus' actions were certainly far beyond just something
that *I* didn't like personally. His attempt to strip his Co-Consul from his
legal office, and remove the two Censors completely against the will of the
Senate was something that threatened to tear Nova Roma and it's government
completely apart. He had no legal right to try starting a Civil War.
Sergius:
>And while you admit freely that the Censores failed to do their jobs (for
whatever list of reasons), you just plain resent anyone else having
pointed it out or trying to hold you responsible.
Cassius:
The Censors WERE doing their jobs. They were answering letters of inquiry,
processing new Citizens, providing assistance with the many questions
regarding Roman Names and Gens, working to keep the Citizen's list current,
etc. The only thing we couldn't do on our own was creating the Tribes, since
this was a large project that we did not have the time or knowledge to
complete properly. We gave notice that we were unable to do this project and
asked officially for assistance. Cincinnatus took on the project, balked on
it HIMSELF for four months, then decided we needed to be drummed out of Nova
Roma as criminals because the work wasn't done.
As I've said before, the Censor positions as they stood were the worst jobs
in Nova Roma. Two people working a couple of hours every night couldn't keep
up with the workload. The people working on the website aren't under that
kind of pressure, yet a Web Team was assigned to share the duties. Why
couldn't have this been done with the Censors?
In any case, feel free to blame me for anything you care to. Just don't
expect me to sit back and not defend myself.
Sergius:
So, according to your own version of events, this "triumvirate that has
no power" set out to totally abolish Nova Roma, deposed the senior Consul
from his office and cut him off from the government, shut down the Web
site, and then came up with this Interregnum and dictatorship idea to
reestablish the State in a form more to their liking.
Obviously we're all really fortunate that the triumvirate is so powerless!
Cassius:
Obviously, we're all really fortunate that the people running the Impeachment
Committee were clueless idiots. They figured they could overthrow the
workings of the legal government and arrange things to their liking, but
never bothered to check up on any facts. They just "assumed" that everything
was set up so that they could act with impunity. Unfortunately for them they
acted a few months too early. Nova Roma was in process of being switched over
from the "founding" status to a more balanced legal base... but the request
to change ownership of the website had not yet been processed by InterNIC,
and the Board of Directors had not yet been switched over to be the Senate
and magistrates - that change was to be made when Nova Roma applied for
federal status. Both those changes are once again in the works. Hopefully the
new Constitution will be help to safeguard against later magistrates seeking
to cut each others throats!
Sergius:
This whole affair is disgusting and tiresome. Everyone concerned (and
that means all of us) would do well to put it behind them as one does
youthful indiscretions of which one is ashamed but has no power to undo.
Cassius:
Interesting - you say that as if your accusations hadn't started this debate
in the first place!
Sergius:
You have posted a great deal, much of it damaging to your own side. I
think the facts are plain by now. From here, it begins to sound like that
infantile game of:
Did too!
Did not!
Did too!
Did not!
Can we just have an end to it, please? Nova Roma may be able to go on
under the changes that our "powerless" Dictator has instituted, but not
if this ongoing quarrel remains at the heart of it. It's time to end it
for the sake of the State.
Cassius:
Nice tactic there, Sergius. It's used a lot on some of the newsgroups such as
alt.pagan: You insult someone to the point where personal honor demands that
they speak up in their own behalf. Then you come to the list and say "Ah,
stop your whining! You're being a childish crybaby, boring everybody, and
wasting bandwidth!"
It was your own comments that started this discussion. I've certainly never
gone out of my way to attack YOU... I don't even know you! And I'm serious
too - your name is unfamiliar to me. Have you ever held a post in Nova Roma
or done anything to help build this Micronation? All I know about you is that
you've appointed yourself my personal critic.
I'll be more than happy to end this debate on the public list. I will defend
myself in public if you or anyone else attacks me in public - personal honor
demands that I do so. If you'd prefer to have an end to it as you say you
wish, feel free to respond to me in private and I will more than happily do
the same.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
Pt I&II Cassius-Cincinnatus Debate |
| From: |
"Lucius" vergil@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:09:37 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
>My apologies for subjecting Nova Roma to yet more long debate on recent
>events. Hopefully this discussion will be helpful to those still willing to
>follow the details...
Cincinnatus: I know some people are tired of this debate, but perhaps Cassius and I should continue our debate and clear the air. While we have disagreed strongly we have also been civilized.
>Note: I've had to split this up into two posts...
Cincinnatus: I put them back together. Cassius, you really ought to ditch AOL it has been a constant source of frustration for you.
>Cassius:
>Actually, I DIDN'T own the web page. Never have. When Cincinnatus and I
>founded Nova Roma he was basically the owner, <SNIP>I called Germanicus, we talked the situation over, and decided to try and give Nova Roma a new
foundation. Too many mistakes had obviously been made originally for a
non-working system to try and repair itself.
Cincinnatus: So you made the decision to just start over regardless of what anyone else had to say. It would have worked if we could have just put the citizens into the Comitiae. Then sent proposals to them to vote on.
>
Cassius:
>Our exchanges on the subject started right after the elections, when you
>began to post disparaging remarks about the Censors on the List, and in the
>live chat. You were saying things like 'If the Censors would only do their
>JOBS, we'd have the tribes' and 'If the Censors would do their JOBS, things
>would be fine'. (Note to all, these are NOT direct quotes from
Cincinnatus...his actual text was similar, but is no longer around for me to cut and
paste it here).
Cincinnatus: Maybe because they weren't ever posted. But even if I did post something similar, how are they disparaging?
>
Cassius:
>Neither Decius Iunius or I appreciated being trashed by the Senior Consul
in a public forum, and I wrote to you pretty much instantly after this started
>happening.
Cincinnatus: You mean like you are trying to trash me now? IF I ever said
anything to anybody, I was the truth. I would like to hear what they have to
say. I wrote Flavia Iucundia privatly after I had found out that she had
been sick. I never mentioned her involvement in the chatroom as most all of
us stopped using the thing after Sulla and Nocturnia had turned into their
hangout. You ought to check your sources.
Cassius
>Anyway, when I wrote to you I explained that I was busy setting up a new
>branch office at work, AND Patricia and I were trying to get moved into our
>new home...
CIncinnatus: This is why I left the subject alone in Jan. Feb. and March But it
seems that either way nothing was getting done.
>
Cassius:
>My involvement with the subject after that was trying to get you a
"perfect" Citizen's list, because you refused to work on the project with the older
>list you had;
>
Cincinnatus: You keep using these "quote" marks when did I ever say perfect? there are still may small errors throughout in the citizens list.
> Cassius:
> >When my Co-Consul (Germanicus) left NR was completely in an uproar.
> >Cincinnatus: Months? Metellus was appointed the Consul, Palladius was
> appointed Censor and I was given a seat in the Senate all in a matter of
> days. The "uproar" was caused by Germanicus returning as suddenly as he
> left, many citizens questioned his motives.
>
>Cassius:
>Yes, we were able to scrabble around and fill the empty positions within a
>couple of days. That doesn't mean that the furor itself died down! People
>were horribly shaken and Nova Roma did *not* just keep running like nothing
>had happened. The furor over the issue only continued when Germanicus was
>able to sort out the issues he'd left under, and realized that he deeply
>regretted his impulsive move to leave Nova Roma completely.
>
Cincinnatus: Impulsive, Yes.
> >
>Cassius:
>So if a magistrate has a temporary schedule problem they are expected to
step down from office?
Cincinnatus: Temporary is one thing, 2 months another, but we still have no
Comitiae after nearly a year and a half. Plus there are two of you, what was Palladius doing during this time? Couldn't he have done something during this time?
> >
> Cassius:
> >At this point, still absorbed at work, I informed Consul Cincinnatus that
I was simply unable to form the tribes.
>
> >Cincinnatus: This sounds like a resignation, without resigning.
>
>Cassius:
>Stating clearly that you can't do a portion of a job isn't resigning -snip-As far as the Citizens list, you had a copy that was a little less than two months out of date when you said you'd do the Tribes.
Cincinnatus: No, more like four or five months. The thing had not been worked on since Nov and I didn't get a copy until April.
>Cassius:
>Excuse me?? A magistrate informs his superior that he can't do a certain
>project because of time/knowledge constraints, and it's not the superior's
>job to do something about the situation
Cincinnatus: How convenent to acknowledge this chain of command now. I was doing something about it, but got thrown out for it.
">Dude, I flatly refused to do the Tribes project on the grounds that I wouldn't be able to properly research it for a few months."
Like you said you refused to do it because you didn't know anything about it.
>
Cassius:
>As far as sending you stuff only just before Roman Days, you're mixing up
two different situations. By April, Decius Iunius and myself had given up on
you and asked for other assistance with the Tribes. <SNIP> (Um, thanks for your
assistance with THAT anyway. That part of things went pretty well,considering!)
Cincinnatus: Yes, it was beggining to work which is one reason I was annoyed
that when we met at Roman Days you decided to go with a different plan after
I had done the work. Then after you get back I start hearing about
more delays. Hey, I am not the only one who was/is upset at the way things
weren't happining.
>
>Cassius:
>Dude, I flatly refused to do the Tribes project on the grounds that I
>wouldn't be able to properly research it for a few months.
>
Cincinnatus: There it is. You are Censor but you won't do the job. That sums up the situtation.
> >
>Cassius:
>You received a list from Flavia Claudia IMMEDIATELY after saying you'd do
the Tribes
Cincinnatus: I offered to do the Tribes in December and I didn't get
anything until April, and it was that far out of date.
>Cassius:>
>The amazing thing is that you yourself was publicly blaming Flavia Iucunda
>for not forwarding the Citizens' list to you at that time. You were going
>into the live chatroom and completely trashing her over it. The Senior
Consul directly abusing a Citizen. About five people almost resigned their
>Citizenship over THAT little episode... Flavia Iucunda was in tears over
it. Yeah, I know, you're just a plain-talking Navy welder type who's not good
>with people...
Cincinnatus: I think you better check your sources. I never did anything of
the sort! Flavia Iucundia and I have always been on pleasant terms and we
still are. She sent me a photo she took while at Roman Days and I have
thanked her for it. As far as being "plain-talking" at least I'm not making things up.
From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------;
Salve,
My apologies for having to post this in two parts. It was too long for my
Email program to send in one piece:
Cincinnatus: Really Cassius, get rid of AOL :-)
Cassius:
>Then of course, with April came the NEW crisis. The whole issue with Sulla
>and the Senate board blew up...
>Cincinnatus: This is not true. Neither Flavia or I made any mention of
exile. I only wanted the citizens to know what had happened. No one ever
said anything about Sulla's citizenship but you, Cassius.
Cassius:
That happens to be completely false. Both of you wanted to hang Sulla -
Cincinnatus: Nope, we didn't want to do to him what was done to me. The only mention of exile was made by you, I don't know where you got it from.
Cassius:
everybody else thought it just wasn't that big an issue. Both
>Germanicus and Flavia Claudia resigned, then came back...
> Cincinnatus: That is because Sulla had hacked into the Senate and we needed
to find a new place for the Senate to meet.
Cassius:
As I recall, a new place was set up within a couple of days. However, having
a place to meet didn't solve all the hurt feelings from the arguments that
had taken place over the issue. The Senate just plain wouldn't talk with
itself anymore.
Cincinnatus: Yes Patricia found a nice site called eGroups.com but no one would use it. I think the registration format threw most people off, but I thought it was a great site for us.
Cincinnatus: Yes, this seems to be the popular answer, Quit.
"Winners never quit and quitters never win."
Cassius:
OH! I always thought that was QUILTERS! One of the many reasons I never took
up sewing in fact. NOW you tell me!
Cincinnatus: That's funny, but many people don't like this quitting answer to a problem. I'm glad you haven't done it because once one quits there is no hope.
>Finally, Cincinnatus was able to force through the ridiculous reprimand for
>Sulla, and then started to propose new business.
> CIncinnatus: You were the only one to vote against it, After you told us you
supported a reprimand. I also posted Sulla's tax proposal and the propsal
for the Sodalitas Pro Infantia to the Senate and took the heat for those not
being accepted, like I was Dictator and I could just say "yea, sure whatever".
Cassius:
I NEVER supported a reprimand for Sulla. You're just plain remembering
wrongly here...
Cincinnatus: Don't remember this?
Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: Hacking into the Senate
>Salvete Senatores, Tribunes, et Quaestor,
>
>It seems I may have been a bit mistaken with my earlier post. I have indeed
>thought that this situation and all it's postings were leading up to a
public trial and (and subsequent expulsion) of Sulla. If I've been mistaken, I
>sincerely apologise! I will happily support a fairly restrained PUBLIC
notice from the Senate, saying that we frown on Sulla's actions, and won't even
raise an objection if a strong PRIVATE warning is added to that, saying that the
>next time he tries to "skim" through a legal loophole it will go much worse
>for him. (As far as I can recall, though, "removing" Sulla has been a topic
of all private correspondence on the subject... so I figured that this
argument was more of the same.) I'll answer some of the particular dialogue below,but again I have no objection of the Senate showing displeasure without causing an incredible legal hassle.
Cincinnatus: No one ever mentioned throwing Sulla out that I saw. We just needed to do something versus doing nothing.
Cassius:
The Senate tentatively started to meet again.
Cincinnatus: I had discussed ideas with Palladius by phone and there were
none that were "unworkable", only different ideas. In any case the tribes
,like the citizens infomation, would be a job that would have to be
continually kept up by the Censores.
Cassius:
Oh, whatever. The proposition that came to me would have demanded constant
attention...
>
CIncinnatus: Well 'constant' maybe a relative term, certianly a few hours a week by whichever Censor was on "duty".
Cassius:
>I explained to Cincinnatus that NOBODY could maintain such a system.
>Cincinnatus: You never "took the job back", because it was always yours. I
only offered to help, but was only given infromation from you the week prior
to Roman Days. Nice bag job, you had over a year to do it and didn't, yet
you give me less that a week. Then when we meet you change your mind and
decide to go with Palladius' plan.
Cassius:
Sorry, Cincinnatus, but I'm the one accusing you of pulling a bag job. I
stated that I couldn't do the Tribes project and you took responsibility for
it. You didn't do it for four months,...
Cincinanatus: Once again, I offered to help by make a propsal in December and I didn't get ANYTHING in the way of information until April and that was so far out of date as to be useless.
Garbage in, garbage out. I don't do work like that.
>
Cassius:
I'm not going to say much since Callidius isn't here to defend himself. I
WILL say that he pushed his plan to the point of encouraging people create
disturbances on the list, etc...
Cincinnatus: I never saw any disturbances caused by the Tullii. I was sorry to see them go.
>
Cassius:
>Naturally, while we tried to make sense out of all the furor going on, yet
>another Crisis hit. Patricia was unable to carry on the website, and
resigned as Webmistress, leaving NR without anyone whatever to keep the site
going. Germanicus volunteered in her wake, and was promised the webmaster
position.The NR site was switched onto a new server, and Germanicus began to
make changes. Then - Gangalius volunteered for the website. Our Consuls felt
that Gangalius would make a better web person, so they stripped Germanicus of
the Webmaster title and handed it over to Gangalius.
> Cincinnnatus: This is NOT true. The Consules, Palladius and I, agreed that
the best way to avoid the problems of the past (The site not being
maintained for months) was to have 2 webmasters and we wanted BOTH Gangalius and Germanicus to work together, IT was Germanicus who QUIT. He wanted complete control or nothing. Aut Caesar aut nihil.
Cassius:
I'm not even going to go into this. It was a long, complex problem that could
easily start yet another huge list argument.
Cincinnatus: No, it wasn't a problem other than Germanicus would not work on the site unless he had final say. Well now he has it and he is happy.
Cincinnatus: This was fixed by Patricia and in the meantime when people asked they were told to print up a application and send it in snail mail. That was always an option and should be the one of choice.
Cassius:
That kind of thing is a pretty poor fix.
Cincinnatus: Germanicus and I had both agreed that a mail in application was better anyway. Like he said initially, if people can be bothered to print up a form, fill it out and mail it in, then they aren't that interested in the first place. Nova Roma booklets are handed out a events with an application on the back to be sent that way. I have some here and they are very nicely done.
Cassius:
What you brought to Roman Days was a partial printout of the Citizen's list -
Cincinnatus: No I had more than that, but the work never got any further.
>
Cassius:
Again, what you did was print out some limited fields from the Citizens' list
the night before. That was NOT a complete plan for the Tribes.
CIncinnatus: I had a whole notebook of stuff we never looked at, You had made up your mind to do it using Palladius' plan beforehand. I knew what his plan was before Roman Days because he had told me about it.
> Cassius:
> I sat down with everyone, , whether
they were done right or not. A bit of an anticlimax after all the fuss, really!
Cincinnatus: Yes, when the subject came up during the meeting you simply
said that you and Palladius would do it by the formula that Palladius had
suggested. So, since you and he were the Censores it is your job anyway, THAT was the end of the discussion! Don't say I didn't have my plan.
Cassius:
"Cincinnatus, you DIDN'T have your...!" Oh, right. Sorry. Anyway, your...
er, "printed material" wasn't quite complete enough to be a better quick
solution than the plan we'd had from Sulla and Graecus.
Cincinnatus: I never saw these other plans.
Cassius:
In fact, we'd have just gone with that one earlier to get the situation over and done with, but Callidius had sworn he'd veto it as Tribune of the Plebs, because he wanted HIS idea put through. Callidius had only resigned his Citizenship a few days before, making the choice possible.
Cincinnatus: Callidius never expressed any such thing as a veto to me, but he had sent his proposal to the Senate.
>
Cassius:
>Now, I didn't get back home until June 21st,
>We got the new folks processed, and then completed the tribes, pretty much
as promised. <SNIP>But still, the tribes were done as of June 24th or so.
>Cincinnatus: Well, then why weren't they posted?? That would have ended the
whole affair but we have never seen them.
Cassius:
A couple of small things. I had trouble getting online because AOL was
failing for a couple of days.
Cincinnatus: AOL again, humm, you ought to get rid of it.
Cassius:
Since Nova Roma was in imminent danger of having one Consul Impeach the
other, and remove both Censors against the will of the Senate, it was
considered to be a time of Emergency. Since there was a legal Senate quorum
action was taken immediately.
Cincinnatus: Palladius was Consul and Censor. Nothing was considered against him as Consul. Only as Censor, as these were the things that were not being done.
Cassius:
Decius Iunius Palladius, Consul, convened the Senate. He had the imperium.
Cincinnatus: And I have Imperium and the Veto, so I vetoed it. But you all did what you wanted anyway. I was elected Consul and if any of you bother to read the Constitution you will see that I can veto the actions of the other Consul. I vetoed this. Thus Germanicus is an upsurper, but you own the website. Hey, I could have made all kinds of changes too, but I was working within the system such as it is.
Cassius:
It is not illegal to "discuss" the conduct of magistrates. I suppose,
strictly speaking, it wasn't ILLEGAL to secretly meet with Citizens...
Cincinnatus, there were MANY possible ways to solve the Tribes situation,
most of them positive. You could have been a real hero...
CIncinnatus: Look if I though I would have had the support you have given to Germanicus, I would have been gald to, but every time I tried to do anything I was getting minimal support or waffling.
Cassius:
No, of course not. NOBODY was "for" impeachment. Weeks had been spent
creating seven pages of Impeachment Articles in legalese, and writing dozens
of letters to magistrates hoping to gather a groundswell of outrage without
any intent of such things being used. In fact, it was just an exercise in
writing! Yeah, that's the ticket!
Cincinnatus:
But there is no need to think on that now as we all now know that we were working under a Triumverate (Germanicus,Cassius,Palladius) the whole time.
Cassius:
At this point, I almost wish that were true.
Cincinnatus: Well the actions you all have taken speak for themselves.
>
>Cincinnatus: The tribes are on the website? When was this announced and
where are they? Let's see them.
Cassius:
I thought they were up on the website! Germanicus was forwarding the document
around...
Cincinnatus: Never saw any post of a list of who is in which tribe. I did see a list of proposed names of tribes.
>Cincinnatus: When you called me, you said you were going to "take it all
down". I said "I guess me being Consul doesn't mean anything." You laughed
at me, yep we know where we stand now.
Cassius:
I certainly DID laugh when you mentioned being Consul not meaning anything...
you obviously didn't think it meant anything to Decius Iunius, since you were
working to strip him from the office. I thought it was amazing that your
office should be considered sacred, but Decius Iunius' Consulship should be
totally expendable.
Cincinnatus: Palladius is both Censor and Consul, only the office of CENSOR was under consideration. But that is just another detail that people are quick to overlook. Like most thing people believe what they want.
Cassius:
Even though people have reviled me for it, I don't regret the Interregnum in
the slightest.
Cincinnatus: And you still say you don't own the site?
Cassius:
Um, I thought Germanicus elevated Scaevola to the Senate! Hardly telling
someone to go away...
Cincinnatus: Well he is not on the Roll of Senate membership page.
Cassius:
I've been meaning to ask you about this! What you ordered was T-shirt
transfers and Nova Roma stamps. They were overdue, but I could have sworn I
gave them to you at Roman Days! I thought I handed them to you on the first
day, June 12th, and you put them in the white cardboard box that you left
with us in the Nova Roma tent. Did they for some reason not make it back home
with you? Anyway, your money was refunded because most of it was a donation
to Nova Roma, and after the blowup I couldn't imagine you were still feeling
terribly generous. Valete, Marcus Cassius Julianus
Cincinnatus: I did see stamps but I never saw any T-shirt transfers.
Did anyone see any Transfers? Audens? Flavia? Gallio? Marcus Equitius? Quintus Equitius?
I guess someone took that box by mistake. We had a LegioXX workshop this past weekend and a few items did turn up and made their way back to their proper owners, (I got my cup and spoon back ) but no cardboard box.
Valete, Lucius Equitius
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Stoic School? |
| From: |
Daniel Dreesbach dreesbach@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 23:32:24 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Iwould liketo join also.
G.Iunius Germanus
--- <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------; wrote:
> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------;
>
> Salve,
>
> I would be MOST interested in seeing a Stoic School
> within Nova Roma! Not
> only do I support such an idea to the hilt, I'd join
> immediately.
>
> Just wanted to get a public "yes" vote out there...
> hopefully this project
> will become reality. L. Gellius Severus, if there is
> anything I can do to
> assist please feel free to Email me!
>
> Vale,
>
> Marcus Cassius Julianus
>
> In a message dated 7/20/99 3:01:13 PM Eastern
> Daylight Time,
> <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=051242203132237135180082190036" >K.H.S@--------</a> writes:
>
> << I am developing plans for a Stoic School
> (Collegium Stoicorum), which would
> aim to help individuals progress towards
> eudaimonia, the vita beata, or the
> happy life.
>
> If there is interest in this, I will set about
> preparing a webpage (not
> necessarily on the NR site, tho a link from the NR
> site would be something
> to aim for), and starting a onelist forum for
> general communication.
>
> If anyone needs to know more in order to decide
> whether they would be
> interested, let me know.
> >>
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor
> ----------------------------
>
> Having difficulty getting "in synch" with list
> members?
> <a href="http://www.onelist.com" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com</a>
> Try ONElist's Shared Calendar to organize events,
> meetings and more!
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: What to Wear (Was What To Do) |
| From: |
Lucius Cornelius Sulla alexious@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:23:59 -0700 |
|
I think you forgot....to add that Carthage Must Be Destroyed too...LOL!
L. Cornelius Sulla
Nicolaus Moravius wrote:
> From: "Nicolaus Moravius" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=091089014007127031215056228219114187071048139" >n_moravius@--------</a>
>
> Quiritibus, plurimam salutem!
>
> Scripsit Rusticus:
>
> >While we pretend to having a functioning government
> >and pretend to have a realistic and propitious model of
> >religious institutions, in fact, we aren't much different
> >from the average bare-knuckled internet hotspot--with
> >one glaring difference: before every computer terminal,
> >regardless of whatever frothy-mouthed denunciations,
> >or wild-eyed doomsday ranting, or childish sputtering
> >of nonsense that might be spewing out of that terminal,
> >--and here's the catch---everyone is wearing a TOGA.
> >
> >
> >Wearer of the Donald Duck bedsheet toga,
> >Cn. Aelius Rusticus
>
> - et sic Cypria:
>
> >*grin* I personally wear a lavender paisley satin bedsheet toga that I
> >stealthfully nicked from Dexippius.
> >
> >Vale
> >
> >Cypria
>
> - It is time, O Cives, that someone spoke out against the appallingly
> un-Roman dress-sense of our young people, and of matrones who ought to know
> better.
>
> Imprimis, C. Aelius Rusticus' Donald Duck bedsheet toga is typical of the
> young man's lack of gravitas and respect for the mos maiorum that made our
> micronation great. I urge the long-suffering Ericius, as his paterfamilias,
> to take the lad firmly into his potestas.
>
> Et item, as for L. Iunia Cypria's shameless admission that she wears male
> attire stolen from an Augur (O sic impudentias!), I am almost speechless. No
> wonder our society is in near-chaos.
>
> I therefore, Citizens, propose to set an example. At this very moment, I am
> decked with the utmost dignitas in my black leather toga virilis (cut from a
> double bedsheet, manly and serviceable in all weathers), with lati clavi in
> chrome studs and chain links. It can also be worn, Cato-fashion, without the
> tunica.
>
> Disdaining such sartorial minimalist overstatements however, as unbecoming
> even a conservative like myself in these modern times, I also wear a blue
> denim tunica with orange hem- and side-stitching, strengthened with copper
> rivets. My feet are shod with black leather caligae, not over-studded in
> chrome, to complement the toga.
>
> The whole, una simul is virile, simple, dignified, and hard-wearing - and
> looks stunning when topped off with a pair of shades. I urge all
> right-thinking (male) citizens to follow my example and put an end to
> sartorial decadence once and for all.
>
> Vestite bene in dignitate Romanum,
>
> Vado Arbiter.
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
> ONElist: your connection to online communities.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
