| Subject: |
Re: Proper name of the SCU |
| From: |
Dav--------eadows <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114232192237248190028232203026129208071" >dmeadows@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 1999 08:51:43 -0400 |
|
Salvete!
I suspect that much of our problem (including my own) with what the
'official title' of the SCU was/really was is due to the fact that
senatusconsulta probably did not always have formal titles, especially one
which was merely a directive to the consuls to see to it that the Republic
came to no harm. It seems to me that a pro-senatorial historian would use
something like s.c. de republica defendenda when describing something they
approved of; another historian (perhaps even senatorial) who thought it
excessive might refer to it as the s.c. ultimum. The senate probably didn't
even give it an official title and I strongly suspect that the form it took
was oral (although its existence would have been recorded in the minutes),
as opposed to being officially written down and later inscribed on bronze
tablets or the like as other senatusconsulta might be. Of course, our
modern historians, who tend to place the Gracchi in a positive light, tend
to use the term SCU, which does, of course, import a value judgement on the
episode in itself ...
Valete
M. Papirius Justus
Paterfamilias gentis Papiriae
At 02:31 PM 04/08/1999 EDT, you wrote:
From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=085056131063158209025056228219114253071048139" >RexM--------us@--------</--------;
Salvete omnes!
I am not sure if this scholarly dispute is already resolved, but I have found
a reference to a German dissertation dealing exclusively with that topic:
Ungern-Sternberg, Untersuchungen zum spätrepublikanischen Notstandsrecht.
Senatus consultum ultimum und hostis-Erklärung (München 1970) (Inquiries into
the the emergency law of the late Republic. SCU and "Hostis"-declaration.
(Munich 1970). If you are still interested, I could take a detour to the
Munich university library on my next trip there ( I can not promise a certain
date for that though)
You should also check out Livy 3.4.9., it is the only reference I know to the
"de re publica defendenda" I can find (apart from the ones in Mommsen and
Durant).
I myself believe the Romans of the late Republic referred to the SCU mainly
as the Senate decree directed to the Consuls, "ne quid res publica detrimenti
caperet" (see Sallust: de coniuratione Catilinae" .29). Cicero himself used
that term in his speeches against Catilina I.2.4 ("Decrevit quondam senatus,
uti L. Opimius consul videret, ne quid res publica detrimenti caperet").
If in the meantime you have found something new to solve the question and
enlighten me, please let me know!
Valete
Marcus Marcius Rex
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
Start a new ONElist list & you can WIN great prizes!
For details on ONElist’s NEW FRIENDS & FAMILY program, go to
<a href="http://www.onelist.com/info/onereachsplash3.html" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/info/onereachsplash3.html</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
]|[ David Meadows ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[ Rogue Classicist ]|[
|
| Subject: |
Re: Personal Stuff |
| From: |
Dexippus@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 09:18:16 EDT |
|
In a message dated 8/4/99 11:01:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=132233234213056031213038109248147208071048" >Donme--------@--------</--------; writes:
<< My darling wife Crystal (Priestess of Juno) has a growth on her eye. We
are a
little nervous about it, and would like all concerned folks to send out love
and light to her. >>
Love and light coming right at ya!!!!!!!
--Dexippus
|
| Subject: |
Coming Senate Deliberations |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@--------) |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 10:35:01 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Salve, Citizens of Nova Roma;
In the coming deliberations of the NR Senate there will be many things
for the Honorable Senators to decide upon. In suopport of Nicolaus
Moravius Vado's comments we must learn to curb our baser instincts on
the net.
Jokes become insults,with regularity, and those receiving such could
rein in their horns just a bit and send a personal message asking if the
intent was really aggressive.
A big problem in the past has been the lack of communication with those
in NR who have questions. Germanicus has done a good job in this area
politically, but the College of Pontiffs have at times been a little
slack. Also I would say to all members again that not all NR Citizens
crouch over their computers waiting for a message from you. I plan to
take some vacation time in the Fall, when my wife is free to, and those
E-Mailing me will have to wait for a reply when I am gone, until such
time as I load myself down with enough electronic gear to have my
messages forwarded. This is not likely however, since I have to take
refresher courses on using my VCR from my son. If you do not receive a
response from someone, it is probably and likely that they are not
there, they took a week off, they are tired, a million different
reasons. So, message someone else that you can depend on to get the
message through.
In regard to Cinncinnatus, I have made my position quite clear, I
believe in the past. I worked closely with him during the time of our
association and found him to be a reasonable and intellgent officer,
willing to listen to another's ideas. Germanicus has chosen to punish
Cinncinnatus for his own reasons, and I would say from what I know of
Germanicus, the reasons were good to him. However, it is now time to
either bring the reasons to light of day to be considered openly by the
Noble Senate, or his position restored, together with dignas and
apology. I have remained silent on this subject throughout the
Ex-Dictator's tenure because of the respect that I have for him and for
the office that he held, and that is why I wanted to know exactly when
he stepped down. I understand that Cinncinnatus can at times be blunt,
and set in his ways. He has not learned the finer points of "letting
someone down easy." If you think that a crime, what about the other
side of the coin? He is honest, he is straightforward and he has always
had the best interest of NR at heart. He has treated his juniors with
respect, if they so treated him. He has used his people to generate
options for Nova Roma. As Vado has said Gangalius is an expert in the
medium that we inhabit, and while he may be somewhat lurid at times, one
cannot find fault with his loyalty, his dedication to his cause, or his
willingness to work for NR. All of these things combine to make the man
or women, and then circumstances tend to twist those attributes in
different ways, masking their true value.. These are good men!!! I
would not under any circumstances fly to Maryland from CT to be with
them if I did not believe that was so. In the end it is a matter of
observation and experience. I will say of Cinncinnatus what I have said
many times before the Captain of my naval ship conducting non-judicial
punishment--
"Sir(s) In answer to your question of me as this man's Division Officer,
I reply that he is a hard worker, has great pride in his industryas well
as his division, and is a force for good in this command. I would be
glad to have him on any team, service, or function over which I am
placed in charge. He has my complete trust, my confidence in making
good decisions, and I recommend strongly sir(s) leniency in your
deliberations." .
In closing I ask the Noble Senate to reflect on my words of the present
and of the past. I ask that the Citizens of NR muzzle the first
responses from your mouths when you believe yourself to be insulted or
ignored and try at least three times before being upset. I posted some
rules for writing on the Net sometime ago which are as true today in
this medium as tey were when they were written in the seventies. The
thrust of these words are to: Consider Your Audience!!! The old Golden
Rule works best here, and if you get even a glimmer that what you are
writing will be taken the wrong way, you are right, it will be.
I thank you kindly for your attention to this message. I most
respectfully ask that Consul Palladius lay this letter before the Noble
Senate in its deliberations, and would most respectfully remind the
Noble Senate that both Pro-Consul Cassius and Consul Palladius have been
working toward the restoration of Cinncinnatus' dignas, pride and
various positions within NR.....
Very Respectfully;
Marcus Municius Audens.
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Re: Has the Dictator Stepped Down? (etc) |
| From: |
"Nicolaus Moravius" n_moravius@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 1999 08:31:18 PDT |
|
Salve Merulle et alii! Scripsit Merullus:
>Salvete Nicolaue Moravi et alii
>
>Please correct my declension of your praenomen if I screw it up.
- erm... I can't. No one has ever vocated me by the praenomen before :-O
>I have no recollection of Germanicus mentioning that he might serve until
>December. I, however, did ask him to consider sticking around for a few
>months, at least until an assembly could be successfully convened and some
>voting completed. Germanicus rejected my suggestion immediately, and
>always
>made it plain, as far as I saw from his posts to this list, that he was
>going to step down as soon as possible, if not a little sooner.
- on or about 26 July (I have these extracts from forwarded text but cannot
locate the originals at present)the following was posted by Germanicus:
><AMPUTATIO>As legally appointed Dictator<AMPUTATIO>, I hereby assume the
>office of curator araneum through the end of the year.>
<AMPUTATIO>(I should say I intend to step down come December...)>
- don't think I'm complaining that Germanicus has modified this decision: no
one can accuse him of inflexibility. I merely intended to point out that
some of us found it all rather confusing.
>This was certainly not the right comment to make. But I think that we all
>make mistakes from time to time, and Novoromani of good will, in Brasilia,
>Thule and elsewhere will find it in their hearts to forgive this breach.
- indeed. But I wished to point out that goodwill is a finite commodity
which can become overdrawn if care is not consistently taken to regenerate
it, rather than always assume it will be there, however one says whatever
one means. Because it won't.
>Germanicus'
>:habitual, combative style of debate verges, in my opinion, on being a
>:negative political attribute.
>
>That's odd. You say that he has a "habitual, combative style", and yet he
>responded politely to just about every single message that I posted
- no. I wrote: 'style of debate'. Perhaps I should have siad: 'style of
disagreement'. I agree that Germanicus' handling of administrative and
procedural business was and is (usually) of a courteous nature; but when the
legal basis for such transactions has been challenged (which you and I have
not done, thus G. has always been polite to both of us personally), he has
tended to take it as a personal criticism and go, verbally, for the throat
and groin. Often under provocation and under stress of heavy workload I
know, but there is great virtue in not replying in kind (even when someone
insults your wife). What's understandably venial in a private citizen looks
a lot worse in a head of state.
>pointing out aspects of his laws with which I disagreed, and even typo's
>and
>Latin grammar mistakes. Some other elected and appointed magistrates here
>have insulted and flamed me for doing such, even though I had sent them
>private e-mails, and offered my comments at their request!
- I don't doubt it. I just thought I'd address some current examples from
the top. I did say there were others. Now, concerning Lucius Equitius'
Consulate, decreed 'vacant'. You, Merulle, suggest:
>All right, challenge it. Perhaps you can adduce some reasoning here why
>the
>Senate should overturn that particular action of Germanicus.
- I can only reiterate what has been said many times before. Cincinnatus was
elected Consul, did his job to the best of his ability, in the way he
thought right and in the best interests of NR. He upset Germanicus' friend
Palladius in the process. Both, in my opinion, took it far too personally
and in over-reacting turned what was essentially an administrative problem
into a constitutional crisis.
>By the way,
>Germanicus himself has already reversed most of the substance of that
>action already
- indeed. As I said before, Germanicus is nothing if not flexible. But if
the action was wrong (or at least inappropriate), should it not be wholly
reversed?
>But while you're preparing your post, including all the references to the
>names of the people who sent you the messages, or are mentioned in those
>messages as bringing about the Impeachment/Interregnum,
- Oh, come on! Most of us have a life outside Main List politics, you know
:-)
>consider the
>alternative: the amnesty that Germanicus put into one of his parting
>edicta. Isn't that amnesty attractive to you in some way?
- of course. I love the idea of a general amnesty, but that would mean a
full reinstatement of all who were stripped of the honours they had formerly
earned.
Because if you
>make a good case, you'll undoubtedly do so by incriminating someone
>(singular, plural, who knows?) in screwing up Nova Roma almost beyond
>repair. As Graecus said in the first week of July, "SOMEONE was stupid".
- stupidity is not a crime, and is its own punishment, surely?
>Your case, if it's good enough to show clearly that Cincinnatus was in no
>way to blame, will point to a different SOMEONE. And our elected
>magistrates next year would be remiss if they did not follow through by
>studying your case and putting that SOMEONE on trial. I for one would
>never
>shut up until such action were taken. So think about it.
- If I read you right, you seem to be saying that some human sacrifice must
be made, so why not Cincinnatus? Look: all the parties involved seem
convinced they acted rightly, legally and in the best interests of Nova
Roma. We don't have to punish anybody for that - nor should we. I thought
that such thinking was in the spirit of general amnesty?
I would like nothing better than a general amnesty. Had Palladius not had
the powerful friends he had, and if Cincinnatus had the friends
in high places he lacked, they could have well have found their present
positions reversed. The most constructive course of action is not to blame
anybody. Thus no one need be punished. If Palladius had been stripped of his
citizenship - and his name - by Cincinnatus, I
would have much the same thing to say now.
>What action was taken against Gangalius? Are you referring to Germanicus
>taking over the webmaster duties? I never saw any statement to the effect
>that that was an action against Gangalius.
- if someone deprives another of office, then is that not an action against
them? (Leaving aside any question of justification).
>If it was a punitive action against Gangalius, then I have a problem with
>this too. I never saw anything like a charge against Ganglius.
- neither did I. And I don't want to see one: I want a general amnesty, and
the best man back in the job (Germanicus is efficient and competent, but
he's not the best Curator Aranei available).
Gangalius invoked Tyr (god and rune-energy) at Germanicus, in an incredibly
heavy-handed attempt to get him to reverse his actions toward Cincinnatus.
In my opinion, that kind of action can have unforseen repercussions, and can
be extremely dangerous to the sender if he doesn't embody the absolute
rectitude he invokes against others.
So I can understand why Gangalius isn't Germanicus' favourite person at the
moment. Even so, a general amnesty is a general amnesty.
>And I for
>one cannot see Nova Roma surviving a pattern of that type of punitive
>action
>in the absence of some kind of adversarial process. The action against
>Cincinnatus, while I cannot say that it was the right or wrong thing to do,
>was the first act of a dictator responding to a crisis -- I resigned myself
>to swallowing that one. But at least in that case Germanicus accompanied
>notification of his decision with this --
>
>"Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus, who has demonstrated a willingness to
>subvert and ignore the Constitution to achieve his desired ends, and as
>such
>represents a grave threat to the State, is hereby removed from membership
>in
>the Senate, his Citizenship is hereby revoked, and he is hereby banned from
>re-applying for Citizenship for a period of ten years."
- are you citing this as a good example of something, Merulle? Please
explain :-)
The only Nova Roma that can go
>forth now is the one that has been shaped by the Dictator.<AMPUTATIO>
If you have a
>good idea for a constitutional amendment, I think that the prudent thing
>now
>would be to send it privately to some of the senators.
- I'm of the opinion that any system can work well enough if everyone
follows it in good faith. Conversely, no constitution will ever be proof
against abuse by people acting in bad faith. It is my belief that it is the
Religio which will hold Nova Roma together, not a legal code. I didn't, and
I don't, see the need for a dictatorship, and to have accepted Germanicus'
invitation to help work on the provisional government's proposed legislation
would have been overtly to concur in their legitimation.
>: ask yourselves, populares: how
>:many peregrini come, observe our wranglings, and leave disgusted, perhaps
>to
>:spread negative publicity about NR wherever they go?
>
>Yes, I've had that concern too. It's hard to put a good face on the
>Impeachment/Interregnum affair, and some of the
>communication/miscommunication that surrounded it. I hope that we can all
>learn from it and move forward all the faster and stronger for it.
- indeed, Merulle; I'm glad we agree on this point at least. But do you not
see that it will be even harder to put a good face on the ugly interregnum
as long as the provisional government's amnesty to the losing side is
qualified, and not general? Otherwise, it will be perceived by many as
personal vindictiveness euphemised as 'considerations of state security'.
Invoking certain emergency powers legislation, the British Army can come and
dig up half my garden for a missile battery any time it wants to. It can be
fluffy about the whole thing and ask me if i'd like to sit on the
Neighbourhood Camouflage Committee to help choose the shade of olive drab
that goes best with what's left of my garden, or it can be spiky and have me
thrown off my property simply for objecting too much. But... once the
emergency was over, I'd expect that everything that was mine would be
returned in full - not that I would be invited to apply for only a portion
of it back.
There would be nothing I could do about the Army arriving, and under certain
circumstances I might even agree that it was necessary, but when the
emergency was over, do you think my first reaction would be to thank them
for all the hard work they'd undertaken on my behalf?
;-)
Valete bene, omnes,
Vado.
|
| Subject: |
Religio Romana News - August 1999 |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 13:15:56 EDT |
|
Salvete Omnes,
In an effort to continue recent progress made with the Religio Romana in Nova
Roma, I'm going to be posting current news regarding the Religio Romana once
each month.
Here's the first installment... the current official info for August 1999:
PRIESTHOOD APPLICATIONS
As has already been posted, the basic requirements for Priesthood in the
Religio Romana have been added to the Pantheon pages of the Nova Roma site.
There is also a new easy to use online form for those wishing to represent
the Religio on an official basis as a member of the Priesthood!
Four online applications for Priesthood were made last month, after the new
material was put up on the NR site. The Pontificial College will begin
informing those applicants about their results starting next Monday, August
9th. Right now there are several rather nasty astrological events going on -
such as Mercury being retrograde until Friday, 7/6/99. A delay finalizing
decisions seemed appropriate, since the same attempt to avoid an inauspicious
time would have been made in the ancient world. Sincere apologies to all
applicants for the extra wait!
Again, if you are interested in becoming a Priest or Priestess within the
Religio Romana, and you made an application BEFORE last month, you will need
to resubmit by using the online form. We've had several people apply over the
last few months... but the Pontificial board from Beseen.com kept crashing
and losing the information. NO applications made before 7/99 are "still
pending". As terrible as that is, we at least now have a much more stable
format for information so it is now possible for the Collegia to actually get
some work done! ;)
LAR STATUES & PENATES PLAQUES from JBL Statues/Sacred Source
Almost two years ago, JBL statues began carrying a product line of
Greco/Roman deity statues at the request of Nova Roma. The bad news is that
while their site has been linked to the Macellum since the founding, they've
sold less than 10 statues to NR Citizens *total*. The worse news is that they
seem to be phasing out their Roman product line as a result. Now for the
good news... they're liquidating their LAR statues (the Lar being the
household god that protects the family) for $19.00 for a *pair* of lar
statues. They also have Penates plaques (the Penates are the household gods
of prosperity) at a discount although I don't have the "liquidation" price on
hand to report. If you practice the Religio and have been wanting a Lar
statue or a representation of the Penates, now is the time to buy before
they're gone. You can get to the JBL website through the Macellum pages - but
these lar and Penates discounts are NOT listed on our link. You'll have to
Email Sacred Source directly at: <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=061154020180082134015232190036129" >--------it@--------</a>
The discount prices mentioned are from their recent surface mail flyer. I
don't believe these prices are up on their website. If you mention the flyer
I imagine they'll honor their "in print" discount prices.
Quite frankly I've not been impressed with Sacred Source recently. They've
done little to market their Roman line. Their website, (www.sacredsource.com)
is difficult to use. I tried looking up their Penates plaque there and the
link goes to something else! They also have a "links" section to Pagan sites
in which Nova Roma is sadly not included. However, these people are *it* for
the more useful Roman pieces. If you contact these folks please do express
support for Roman statuary, and also mention Nova Roma by name! If they close
their Roman line there will be NO other source for Lar statues, Penates,
Vesta images or the like in the entire world.
OTHER NEWS:
If you haven't visited the Pantheon section of the Nova Roma site in the past
few weeks, be sure to check out the new authentic ancient Roman prayers which
were recently posted. (I'm afraid I no longer remember who submitted them to
Germanicus for posting, my apologies!) but they're wonderful pieces with both
the original Latin and English translations after.
I've also heard from someone who is writing basic "how to" info about setting
up a home Lararium and beginning household worship. This is exciting stuff,
since several folks have mentioned that they're not quite sure how to begin
working with the daily rites which are already on the Religio pages of the
Nova Roma site. With luck this information will be submitted for the Eagle,
(and THEN for the website!) soon.
That's it for this month. Hopefully more folks will be applying for
priesthood, or will be holding local Provincia religious events, etc. in the
future. If anyone has news they'd like to see posted here please contact me.
(Remember, most news should go to "The Eagle", the official newsletter,
before it comes to this list...)
If anyone has questions about anything concerning the Religio Romana, they
are as always welcome to Email the Pontifices as a group at:
<a href="/post/--------roma?protectID=197233234165082131036102163219114090071048139" >po--------ices@--------</a> or myself at: <a href="/post/--------roma?protectID=219166066112082162090218066036129208" >cassius@--------</a>.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
Pontifex Maximus
(posting on behalf of the Pontificial College)
|
| Subject: |
Re: Coming Senate Deliberations |
| From: |
Dexippus@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 13:53:08 EDT |
|
I echoe with Audens in that Cincinnatus must be fully restored as a citizen,
a magistrate, and a pontiff.
This should be done not as an invitation for Cincinnatus to rejoin but as an
act of dignitas by our organization.
--Damianus Lucianus Dexippus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News - August 1999 |
| From: |
"Don and Crys Meaker" famromo@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 12:57:34 -0500 |
|
On 5 Aug 99, --------3:15, <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------; wrote:
>
> Again, if you are interested in becoming a Priest or Priestess within the
> Religio Romana, and you made an application BEFORE last month, you will
> need to resubmit by using the online form. We've had several people apply
> over the last few months... but the Pontificial board from Beseen.com kept
> crashing and losing the information. NO applications made before 7/99 are
> "still pending". As terrible as that is, we at least now have a much more
> stable format for information so it is now possible for the Collegia to
> actually get some work done! ;)
Sue me! I'm dense. Maybe I can't read properly with this eye.
Maybe the kids have finally fried my brain. Just BEAR WITH ME.
Do I have to 'officially' reapply? Do I have to apply at all? Do you
want some sort of application for the record, and if so how come
the email wasn't enough?
I just want to be ABSOLUTELY clear!!!!!!! I know this trait annoys
more than one NR but ... well ... oh well.
Also, I would like to mention that on the Schedule page within the
Temple of Iuno website are ALL the Roman Holidays. The NR
website is missing holidays over about half a year. No easy job ...
it took me about 19 hours to put the whole kit and kaboodle
together and it STILL isn't as pretty as I would like it.
Amethystia Iunia Crystallina -- Iunonis Templique Sacerdote
<a href="http://www.delphi.com/iuno" target="_top" >http://www.delphi.com/iuno</a>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News - August 1999 |
| From: |
Dexippus@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:09:41 EDT |
|
There is no picture of the Lar and the pic for the Penates does not load.
Does anyone know what these look like? I don't want to order something
unless I know what it looks like.
--Dexippus
In a message dated 8/5/99 1:32:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------; writes:
<< Almost two years ago, JBL statues began carrying a product line of
Greco/Roman deity statues at the request of Nova Roma. The bad news is that
while their site has been linked to the Macellum since the founding, they've
sold less than 10 statues to NR Citizens *total*. The worse news is that
they
seem to be phasing out their Roman product line as a result. Now for the
good news... they're liquidating their LAR statues (the Lar being the
household god that protects the family) for $19.00 for a *pair* of lar
statues. They also have Penates plaques (the Penates are the household gods
of prosperity) at a discount although I don't have the "liquidation" price
on
hand to report. If you practice the Religio and have been wanting a Lar
statue or a representation of the Penates, now is the time to buy before
they're gone. You can get to the JBL website through the Macellum pages -
but
these lar and Penates discounts are NOT listed on our link. You'll have to
Email Sacred Source directly at: <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=061154020180082134015232190036129" >--------it@--------</a> >>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News - August 1999 |
| From: |
"Lucius" vergil@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:17:42 -0400 |
|
Salvete
Please excuse the picture, but as is said 'a picture is worth a thousand
words'.
Note! mine is painted. I did this myself (I'm not an artist as you can see).
They come totally brown.
Valete, Cincinnatus
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=132056131009152219130232203140129208071" >Dexippus@--------</--------;
>
>There is no picture of the Lar and the pic for the Penates does not load.
>
>Does anyone know what these look like? I don't want to order something
>unless I know what it looks like.
>
>--Dexippus
> these lar and Penates discounts are NOT listed on our link. You'll have to
> Email Sacred Source directly at: <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=061154020180082134015232190036129" >--------it@--------</a> >>
>
>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
>Transfer your big list to ONElist and earn $500!
>For program details, go to
><a href="http://www.onelist.com/info/biglistbon_intro.html" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/info/biglistbon_intro.html</a>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:21:55 EDT |
|
Salvete,
To make things ABSOLUTELY clear... if someone has already applied and
received a Priesthood or Auger position, they don't have to re-apply yet
again. There is also no need to re-apply if you've requested a position but
been declined for such things as not actually believing the Roman gods exist,
etc.
You're fine, Crys! You are DEFINITELY Priestess of Juno!
What I was referring to was several Priesthood applications which were made
over the last few months... but *never* replied to. There were a few of
those! We had some instances where the Beseen.com board the Pontifices were
using went down, and lost all information. THAT was a tragedy and we do hope
that those folks will be re-applying in the future.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
In a message dated 8/5/1999 10:58:05 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=230166014180193192112218004036129208" >famromo@--------</a> writes:
<<
Do I have to 'officially' reapply? Do I have to apply at all? Do you
want some sort of application for the record, and if so how come
the email wasn't enough?
>>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News - (statuary) |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:28:02 EDT |
|
In a message dated 8/5/1999 11:10:13 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=132056131009152219130232203140129208071" >Dexippus@--------</--------; writes:
<<
There is no picture of the Lar and the pic for the Penates does not load.
Does anyone know what these look like? I don't want to order something
unless I know what it looks like.
>>
Salve,
The pieces are pretty nice. I submitted the original images for them to
produce from myself! However, definitely take a look before you buy.
Your best bet is to Email Sacred Source and ask for their latest sale
brochure. They'll send it to you by surface mail if you give your address...
the Lar and Penates have full color pictures in that. They're also quick with
surface mail and will get it processed same day or next day.
The dissapointment with Sacred source has been that their website is almost
impossible to navigate, and they've never tried to *interact* with their
Roman market after they made their statues. The couldn't supply Nova Roma
with proper images to help them market their items. They ALSO had made a deal
where the treasury was supposed to get 10% of each sale coming from
Citizens... but to my knowledge they never actually have forwarded any money
to the treasury. This was probably more due to thier horrible accounting
system than dishonesty on their part. It's also been impossible for US to
know how much has really sold, since they couldn't update any of their
software to keep accurate track.
All this aside though, the Lar and Penates they're selling off are pretty
incredible deals. They're also the first Lar and Penates that have been
produced for USE since ancient Rome. When they close out this line they may
sadly also be the last.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio News - Lar |
| From: |
Cassius622@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:33:01 EDT |
|
Salvete,
Wow, Cincinnatus, you did a really great job of painting that Lar! The
ancient Lar statues were usually bronze and I've never seen a painted
example... that's why JBL did them in a bronze coloring.
However the Romans of course DID paint statues of many types, and that nifty
one of yours would have been well recieved in any Roman Lararium I think!
Vale,
Cassius
In a message dated 8/5/1999 11:17:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
<a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=081056091108082153015038190036129" >v--------l@--------</a> writ--------br>
<<
Please excuse the picture, but as is said 'a picture is worth a thousand
words'.
Note! mine is painted. I did this myself (I'm not an artist as you can see).
They come totally brown.
>>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Religio News - Lar |
| From: |
"Lucius" vergil@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 14:59:22 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
>
>Wow, Cincinnatus, you did a really great job of painting that Lar! The
>ancient Lar statues were usually bronze and I've never seen a painted
>example... that's why JBL did them in a bronze coloring.
Thank you Cassius. I also have the Penates 'plaque' and I painted that as
well. I have the Vesta, which is also a relief and is not painted.
BTW the Lar statue is 8 1/4" tall. The Penates is 11 1/4" tall X 10 wide.
>
>However the Romans of course DID paint statues of many types, and that
nifty
>one of yours would have been well recieved in any Roman Lararium I think!
>>Vale, Cassius
Thanks again :-)
Yes, most all statues were painted and the 'Penates' plaque that JBL offers
is actually a copy of a painted Lararium shrine in Pompeii. JBL's Penates
does not come painted either.
If anyone wants to see a picture let me know (it is a bigger picture and
would take longer to download and some of the list subscribbers don't like
it when I send pictures). I will send it to you.
Vale, Cincinnatus
PS The people at JBL were very nice and helpful as I had to return an item
that was damaged.
|
| Subject: |
Re: Has the Dictator Stepped Down? (etc) |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 15:23:51 -0400 |
|
Salvete Niclaue Moravi et alii
>From: "Nicolaus Moravius" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=091089014007127031215056228219114187071048139" >n_moravius@--------</a>
>
In reference to Germanicus possibly sticking around until December, you
wrote -
>- on or about 26 July (I have these extracts from forwarded text but cannot
>locate the originals at present)the following was posted by Germanicus:
>
>><AMPUTATIO>As legally appointed Dictator<AMPUTATIO>, I hereby assume the
>>office of curator araneum through the end of the year.>
><AMPUTATIO>(I should say I intend to step down come December...)>
I understood when I read this that he was referring to the office of curator
araneae, not to the office of dictator. The latter he pretty consistently
was looking to shed the sooner the better.
>
About Germnicus' poor choice of words ("English-impaired")..
>- indeed. But I wished to point out that goodwill is a finite commodity
>which can become overdrawn if care is not consistently taken to regenerate
>it, rather than always assume it will be there, however one says whatever
>one means. Because it won't.
Yes, you're right about that.
>
>- no. I wrote: 'style of debate'. Perhaps I should have siad: 'style of
>disagreement'. I agree that Germanicus' handling of administrative and
>procedural business was and is (usually) of a courteous nature; but when
the
>legal basis for such transactions has been challenged (which you and I have
>not done, thus G. has always been polite to both of us personally),
I should say that almost all the communication between Germanicus and me has
been through this list.
he has
>tended to take it as a personal criticism and go, verbally, for the throat
>and groin. Often under provocation and under stress of heavy workload I
>know, but there is great virtue in not replying in kind (even when someone
>insults your wife). What's understandably venial in a private citizen looks
>a lot worse in a head of state.
Right, I see. Like the "higher standard" to which Germanicus referred in
explaining his decision to Cincinnatus recently.
>
Now, concerning Lucius Equitius'
>Consulate, decreed 'vacant'. You, Merulle, suggest:
>
>>All right, challenge it. Perhaps you can adduce some reasoning here why
>>the
>>Senate should overturn that particular action of Germanicus.
>
>- I can only reiterate what has been said many times before. Cincinnatus
was
>elected Consul, did his job to the best of his ability, in the way he
>thought right and in the best interests of NR. He upset Germanicus' friend
>Palladius in the process. Both, in my opinion, took it far too personally
>and in over-reacting turned what was essentially an administrative problem
>into a constitutional crisis.
For what it's worth, I was relieved when I received e-mail from Cincinnatus
and Palladius during the Interregnum (they didn't write to me personally,
but kindly included me in recipient lists of messages that they were
exchanging seemingly in an effort to start a rallying point for restoring
Nova Roma). Hey, these were the elected, senior magistrates, the very two
people I would have thought could restore Nova Roma. I cannot champion the
decision to act against Cincinnatus, not at all. When you say that
Cincinnatus "upset Germanicus' friend Palladius in the process", you must be
referring to some real upset and processes of which I remain ignorant. But
don't take this as a request to elaborate, it isn't. As far as I'm
concerned, unless you lay it all out roughly in chronological sequence, as a
case, it's just another opinion on what is essentially history. Might make
a nice addition to the Chronicles of Nova Roma, if there are going to be any
more of those. Or, you can send me your opinion privately if you want me to
know it. Or not, as you like :).
You see, I have opinions about most everything too, but I am not going to
second-guess this first act of Nova Roma's dictator responding to a crisis.
Not unless I have some information that I believe Germanicus and Palladius
do not have, and that's not the case.
Now, why don't I second-guess the ex-dictator? Is it because I'm afraid?
Well, I have never seen Germanicus, or any of you, except in some little
jpeg's, and not many people inspire fear in me anyway. It isn't that. It's
because I remain a lover of Rome, and am interested in Nova Roma's continued
existence and potential success, as I was when I joined almost a year ago.
If we accept as true that Germanicus acted against Cincinnatus as he did out
of personal malice or vengeance, then it follows that Germanicus was
probably installed as dictator illegitimately; if that is true, then Nova
Roma is going to, or should, splinter into at the very least two, but
probably more pretty soon, factions: those who believe in Palladius and
Germanicus vs. those who believe in Cincinnatus.
And frankly, the whole thing becomes a totally pointless waste of time.
There isn't a food supply or city over which the factions can fight, even if
one values war for war's sake. So let's not bother with a recreation of
civil war here.
I remain greatly disappointed by the Impeachment/Interregnum history. I
called for an investigation looking for the parties responsible, and M
Mucius Scaevola Magister explained to me here on this list basically that
everyone was implicated and therefore noone could investigate. I cannot
argue with his judgment. And since that time, I have come to realize that
even if someone were in a position of authority now who could conduct an
investigation, any investigation and trial process would fail and take Nova
Roma down with it. So, I now reverse myself, and say, let's take the
dictator's amnesty and get on with life.
>
>
>- indeed. As I said before, Germanicus is nothing if not flexible. But if
>the action was wrong (or at least inappropriate), should it not be wholly
>reversed?
It depends on what sort of "wrong" you mean. It sounds like you're not 100%
certain ("or at least inappropriate"). If Germanicus acted against
Cincinnatus out of malice....well, we have all been had. Barring that, on
what points was Germanicus correct or incorrect? To sort that out would
require a formal process, wouldn't it? An investigation and then some sort
of trial or arbitration? Does that sound like a constructive pursuit for
Nova Roma to undertake now or in the near future?
>
>- Oh, come on! Most of us have a life outside Main List politics, you know
>:-)
Everyone but me. My wife, daughter and work will just have to wait while I
make noise in the forum :). Iocum feci ridere amabo
>
CMM->>consider the
>>alternative: the amnesty that Germanicus put into one of his parting
>>edicta. Isn't that amnesty attractive to you in some way?
>
NMV->- of course. I love the idea of a general amnesty, but that would mean
a
>full reinstatement of all who were stripped of the honours they had
formerly
>earned.
You love the idea of a general amnesty, and I'm kind of fond of it too, but
Germanicus didn't really produce one of those. His is qualified, as you
say. But it's the only amnesty around these parts nowadays, isn't it?
>
>- stupidity is not a crime, and is its own punishment, surely?
The particular brand of stupidity to which Graecus seemed to refer, namely,
the stupidity of making/amplifying trouble among the magistrates and
senators of Nova Roma, could entail some crimes, quite easily. While that
brand of stupidity, like others, may carry with it some punishment, I
wouldn't have minded topping those inherent punishments off with
crucifixion, or its nearest virtual equivalent. But hey, it can't be done.
Woe is me, I can't sort out who's to blame, see that the search for blame is
a short road to nowhere and so I resign myself not to blame anyone at all.
>
>
>- If I read you right, you seem to be saying that some human sacrifice must
>be made, so why not Cincinnatus?
As I said before, I don't justify Germanicus' action against Cincinnatus.
Cincinnatus was elected consul, he obviously took Nova Roma seriously;
would he, however, or does he, want us to split ourselves into factions, and
quickly thereafter into nothing?
De Gangalio -
>
>- if someone deprives another of office, then is that not an action against
>them? (Leaving aside any question of justification).
It is not necessarily punitive. As I recall, Germanicus announced that he
needed to assume the function himself because he had such a volume of things
to add to the website as to make it impractical to leave Gangalius in the
job. To me, that would not be action against Gangalius.
>
CMM->>If it was a punitive action against Gangalius, then I have a problem
with
>>this too. I never saw anything like a charge against Ganglius.
>
NMV>- neither did I. And I don't want to see one: I want a general amnesty,
and
>the best man back in the job
CMM-A couple of things here:
i) I don't want to see an accusation against Gangalius either, because I
don't want it to be the case that punitive action has been taken against
him; but if such punitive action has been taken, I want to be informed both
of the action and the full reasons why. If Nova Roma is turning into a
place where we just shove each other aside when we take a disliking one to
another, or perceive some wrongdoing on someone's part, I need to know this;
ii) I thought that Germanicus' amnesty covered events leading up to the
Impeachment/Interregnum? Was Gangalius accused by Germanicus of involvement
in that, or in something later? Or of nothing at all?
>Gangalius invoked Tyr (god and rune-energy) at Germanicus, in an incredibly
>heavy-handed attempt to get him to reverse his actions toward Cincinnatus.
>In my opinion, that kind of action can have unforseen repercussions, and
can
>be extremely dangerous to the sender if he doesn't embody the absolute
>rectitude he invokes against others.
>So I can understand why Gangalius isn't Germanicus' favourite person at the
>moment. Even so, a general amnesty is a general amnesty.
Is that why Gangalius was removed as curator araneae? If so, well....
ummm....Friends! Can we please not cast runes at each other? And not lash
out at each other like dogs fighting over meat?
>
About my quote of Germanicus accusing Cincinnatus --
>
>- are you citing this as a good example of something, Merulle? Please
>explain :-)
It's an example of an accusation. Not very specific, but at least an
accusation. Was anything like this said against Gangalius in the context of
removing him from his duties as curator araneae?
>
>
>- I'm of the opinion that any system can work well enough if everyone
>follows it in good faith. Conversely, no constitution will ever be proof
>against abuse by people acting in bad faith.
That's a good opinion.
It is my belief that it is the
>Religio which will hold Nova Roma together, not a legal code.
Right again. Not that the two will be unrelated, though. And surely you
see that over time a thing like a legal code has utility? An important
difference is that the Religio can be a cause to bring people together,
whereas no legal code can.
By the way, has the Pontifex Maximus questioned Germanicus' legitimacy?
I didn't, and
>I don't, see the need for a dictatorship, and to have accepted Germanicus'
>invitation to help work on the provisional government's proposed
legislation
>would have been overtly to concur in their legitimation.
I understand. I am interested in legitimation of Germanicus, chiefly
because I see such legitimation as the only way for Nova Roma now, and also,
because Germanicus' work has impressed me, in the speed with which he
produced it, the way in which he went about it, and his attitude toward the
office and Nova Roma as a whole.
But do you not
>see that it will be even harder to put a good face on the ugly interregnum
>as long as the provisional government's amnesty to the losing side is
>qualified, and not general?
Yes, I admit to that. Until this recent history can be drowned out by some
goodness, the beginnings of which I saw in the Ludi Apollinares, it will be
hard to look at the Impeachment/Interregnum affair.
Otherwise, it will be perceived by many as
>personal vindictiveness euphemised as 'considerations of state security'.
I myself am trying not to subscribe to that perception, because, adoption of
it leads me back to my own absurdity, talking to you at length about Nova
Roma here and now, in hoping for our future, and so on. And it spells
certain doom for Nova Roma, just around the corner.
>
--Excellent story about the British Army walking all over Vado deleted for
space--.
>
>There would be nothing I could do about the Army arriving, and under
certain
>circumstances I might even agree that it was necessary, but when the
>emergency was over, do you think my first reaction would be to thank them
>for all the hard work they'd undertaken on my behalf?
>;-)
Thank you for making your point in such an amusing way. But, I hardly think
that Germanicus has brought an army to trample and dig up your garden. If
you believe that Cincinnatus has worked hard for Nova Roma, and you care
about Nova Roma, then I think that you could in good conscience thank
Germanicus for his work.
>
>Valete bene, omnes,
>
>Vado.
Et ut tu valeas
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Holidays |
| From: |
"Don and Crys Meaker" famromo@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 15:13:33 -0500 |
|
If anyone has any chatrooms or messageboards they would like to
see attached/linked to the completed list of Roman holidays,
please let me know the address.
Also if some of the more knowledgeable could please go over my
work. I think I got all of them, but I'm not 100% sure. I'd rather be
correct than proud.
And the correct address t o the page ought to be in the sig line
now.
Amethystia Iunia Crystallina -- Iunonis Templique Sacerdote
<a href="http://famromo.wiccan.net/iuno" target="_top" >http://famromo.wiccan.net/iuno</a>
|
| Subject: |
[Fwd: Senate IS Convened] |
| From: |
Decius Iunius Palladius amcgrath@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 16:39:02 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Salvete Cives! In the interests of keeping the people informed, I am
forwarding this to you to let you know what the senate is doing. The
Senate will be debating until Sunday night, after that, a vote will be
held.
Valete,
Decius Iunius Palladius,
Consul
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 16:14:56 -0400
From: Decius Iunius &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=014158113165021154015057190036129" &g--------a----------------&l--------&g--------r>
To: Art McGrath <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232219108127031050199203252129208071" >amcgrath@--------</a>
Subject: [Fwd: Senate IS Convened]
|
| Subject: |
Senate IS Convened |
| From: |
<--------lass="msghead"> Decius Iunius &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=014158113165021154015057190036129" &g--------a----------------&l--------&g--------td>
| Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 1999 00:44:47 -0400 |
|
I have sent this to the senate address and to a few individual
addresses, namely those senators who did not respond to my test on the
<a href="/post/--------roma?protectID=061056234237175198015158190036129" >se--------@--------</a> address, or those like Sulla who did --------receive
anything from that address.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Salvete Senatores! The auspices having been taken and the omens
for today being good, I, as announced yesterday, hereby convene
the Senate of Nova Roma to discuss and deliberate the actions
taken by Flavius Vedius Germanicus as dictator in recent weeks.
There is a lot of ground to cover to say the least. His output was
prodigious and the results complex. This will probably be the
most complicated set of items that the senate will ever have
to review at one time.
Before I begin, let me welcome all the new senators. You have joined
a body that is heir to an august history. We work in the shadow
of many great ancient Romans who held the rank of Senator: Augustus,
Gaius Iulius Caesar, Marcus Iunius Brutus, Lucius Iunius Brutus, Gaius
Marius, Marcus Tullius Cicero, Lucius Cornelius Sulla and many others.
While it is a daunting thought to think that we are their heirs,
it is well to remember them and our purpose while in the Senate.
Before I present the items to discuss, I intend to revive an ancient
tradition today. It is a tradition that is primarily associated with
the Imperial Era and was started by Augustus, but nevertheless suits
the purpose and focus of Nova Roma quite well. The tradition is to
start each meeting of the senate with prayers and offerings to the
Goddess Victory at the Altar of Victory. For those of you not familiar
with the Altar or its history, it was put in the Senate house by
Augustus after the battle of Actium. It was meant to represent not just
his victory but the triumph of the Roman spirit over adversity.
Eventually it became the symbol of all the state cults of Rome, and in
the 4th Century, it became a symbol of the conflict between the fading
Pagan religion and the ascending Christian one. Nothing else represented
Paganism more the Ara Victoria, the Altar of Victory. When it was
removed, the Christians considered it a great victory and the
traditional Romans (Pagans) believed that the link between the Gods and
the State was severed. By once again beginning our deliberations with
prayers at the (virtual for now) Altar of Victory, we affirm that the
link between the Roman State and the Gods is once more whole. I hope
that in the near future we will have a picture on the website of the
Altar.
I do not know the historical prayer or offering to Victory, but
if anyone does, please let me know. (it may be found in the writings of
the Christian writer Prudentius, who wrote against the Altar and its
defender, Senator Quintus Aurelius Symmachus, but I have not checked) I
also am not sure if all senators prayed and made offerings or just
certain ones and priests. Considering the size of the senate, I would
imagine it was done by priests designated for the task, or by the
consuls. In our medium however, we are all able to if we wish.
(traditionally, the offerings were wine and incense)
Salve Victoria, Magna Dea! Once again the Senate of Rome prays to you.
We have not forgotten you. Give us your strength to guide Nova Roma
through this uncertain time and into the future. We swear on your
Altar to do as we think is best for our Republic and ask for you
to help us triumph over adversity. We hope our offerings please
you, whatever each of us is able to give. Ita est!
Salve Iuppiter! Si sciens fallo, tum me Dispiter salva urbe arceque
bonis eiciat ut ego hunc lapidem.
And now Patres et Conscripti, to the business at hand,
The work of Flavius Vedius Germanicus covered several areas in
reforming the political system: the laws, the constitution,
and his edicts, which have the force of laws. Much of this
was procedural improvements, to make the system run more
smoothly--frankly to make it run, period. The laws fill in
gaps not covered by the Constitution and make it possible for
the Constitution to be a working document; they also give
guidelines for the Comitiae, the issuance of edicta, and other
items. Also, there are procedural documents such as decreta
and Senatus Consulta, to make the process easier for the
College of Augurs, the Pontiffs and the Senate to deliberate.
(the latter was sent to each of you with my notice
convening the senate) Also, his edicts (edicta) range from, among other
things, the election nullification (in order to put the
system back on a legal footing), to the exile and
removal from the Senate of Lucius Equitius, to the
appointment of new people to the senate.
As I said, there is a lot there and only a few days to
discuss it in. Nova Roma can not have us deliberating forever,
nor shall we. Much has already been said on the list about
everything Flavius Vedius has done but we must discuss it here
once more. While you may expound as long as you like in a
message, I ask you to keep the *number* of messages to
a minimum. There are 11 of us which gives the potential
for a lot of messages and bandwidth.
We shall discuss the following items in the following order:
the Constitution,
the laws,
edicta,
decreta et senatus consultum.
We shall most likely vote on all the items in the above
groups *as* groups, due to the sheer number of individual
items we would have to vote on.
[this is an insert I am putting in now for the list. More than likely,
some individual items will be voted on, among them I assume the edict
removing Lucius Equitius from the Senate and exiling him. If this were
reversed, he would automatically be reinstated as citizen, senator and
Flame Martialis.]
I would be willing to vote enmasse on everything as it
stands now, such is I believe the quality of what has been
done and such is the time that has been spent on it already.
That, however, would be an abrogation of our duty as the senate.
At first my intention was to discuss exclusively one topic, then the
next and then so on down the line. That would take more than the
allotted time though, so you may discuss all of the actions taken by
Flavius Vedius in the same message is you wish. I do ask that in your
messages though that you go list topics by the order I have listed
above, if only to alleviate confusion. I endorse wholeheartedly the
actions taken by Flavius Vedius Germanicus. It is now your duty to state
your opinions on his various actions.
Below is a list of all items that Flavius Vedius enacted during his
tenure. The text of each document may be viewed in the
Aerarium Saturni, located at the Nova Roma website. Note that some of
his earlier edicta were superseded by later ones.
Constitution (1999): the new constitution implemented by dictator
Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Leges
The following laws have been enacted by either the comitia
centuriata, comitia populi tributa, or comitia plebis tributa.
Lex Vedia de Ratione Edictium (8/1/99): procedures for the
issuance of magisterial edicta.
Lex Vedia Centuriata (7/30/99): guidelines for the censors to
form the centuries
Lex Vedia Tributorum (7/30/99): guidelines for the censors
to form the tribes
Lex Vedia Senatoria (7/30/99): guidelines for
censors to appoint Senators
Lex Vedia Vigintisexviri (7/30/99): description of the
vigintisexviri (minor magistrates)
Lex Vedia Apparitoria (7/30/99): description of the
apparitoria (non-elected assistants)
Lex Vedia de Ratione Eligium (7/30/99): procedures for
voting in the comitia
Lex Vedia de Ratione Centuriatorum Comitiorum (7/30/99):
procedures for the comitia centuriata
Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis Tributorum (7/30/99):
procedures for the comitia plebis tributa
Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Populi Tributorum (7/30/99):
procedures for the comitia populi tributa
Various Edicta (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/30/99)
Senate Membership (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/26/99)
Curator Araneum Appointment (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus
7/26/99)
Senate Membership (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/26/99)
Senate Appointment (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/21/99)
Senate Appointments (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/19/99)
Appointment of Marcus Cornelius Felix as Pontiff (Dictator
Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/7/99)
Conditions for the Reinstatement of Cincinnatus (Dictator
Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/6/99)
Appointment of Pro Tempore Magistrates (Dictator Flavius
Vedius Germanicus (7/4/99)
Initial Statement (Dictator Flavius Vedius Germanicus 7/4/99)
Priestly Decreta
The following decreta have been issued by the various
priestly collegia:
Decretum Pro Qui In Collegium Pontificum et Collegium Augurum (7/30/99):
description of the collegium pontificum and collegium augurum
Decretum de Rationi Comitiorum Curiatorum (7/30/99):
procedures for the comitia curiata
Decretum de Ratione Pontificum Collegii (7/30/99):
procedures for the collegium pontificum
Decretum de Ratione Augurum Collegii (7/30/99): procedures
for the collegium augurum
Senatus Consulta
The following Senatus consulta have been voted on and
passed by the Senate:
Senatus Consultum De Ratione Senatus (7/30/99):
procedures for the Senate
Senatus Consultum Pecunium MMDCCLII (7/30/99): annual budget
for 1999 (2752 AUC)
Constitution (1999): the new constitution implemented by dictator
Flavius Vedius Germanicus
Valete Senatores,
May the Gods guide the Senate and Nova Roma,
Decius Iunius Palladius,
Consul
|
| Subject: |
Re: Proper name of the SCU |
| From: |
Mike Macnair MikeMacnair@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 16:50:27 -0400 |
|
M. Papirius Justus wrote:
>I suspect that much of our problem (including my own) with what the
>'official title' of the SCU was/really was is due to the fact that
>senatusconsulta probably did not always have formal titles, especially one
>which was merely a directive to the consuls to see to it that the Republic
>came to no harm. It seems to me that a pro-senatorial historian would use
>something like s.c. de republica defendenda when describing something they
>approved of; another historian (perhaps even senatorial) who thought it
>excessive might refer to it as the s.c. ultimum.
This is an excellent point which brings out the fact that "SCU" was
controversial in its own time.
I would add that it seems to me that the constitutional status of the
Senate's proceedings in all the cases referred to as "SCU" cases was
questionable.
There's a close analogy, I think, with the power claimed by English
Kings until 1688 to suspend laws (after all, all that the "SCU" is, is a
power in the Senate to suspend normal due process rules). The suspending
power could plausibly be claimed to have sound constitutional precedents
and foundations, and its use in the Great Fire of 1666 was uncontroversial.
Equally plausibly it could be said to be a threat to the rule of law, and
James II united the political nation against himself by using it.
It seems to me that the Senate's use of "SCU" episodically to knock
the heads off the populares was similarly a major factor in the fall of the
Republic. Suspending powers ultimately justified by the example of "SCU"
have, moreover, been used to give constitutional cover to coups d'etat on
at least ten occasions in the twentieth century. I think that we should
retain the Dictatorship for exceptional problems - after all, it's worked
rather well this time - but avoid following the pessima exampla of the late
republican optimates.
Valete,
M.Mucius Scaevola Magister
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News - August 1999 |
| From: |
Mike Macnair MikeMacnair@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 16:57:37 -0400 |
|
Dexippus wrote,
>There is no picture of the Lar and the pic for the Penates does not load.
>Does anyone know what these look like? I don't want to order something
>unless I know what it looks like.
The Lar is quite nice; the Penates a rather less successful bas-relief.
Both brown. But then, if I was going to be really authentic I guess I ought
to paint them.
MMSM
|
| Subject: |
Re: Religio Romana News - August 1999 |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 17:47:38 -0400 |
|
Salvete Marce Cassi et alii
Thank you. This news bulletin is a great idea.
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------;
>
>LAR STATUES & PENATES PLAQUES from JBL Statues/Sacred Source
>
>good news... they're liquidating their LAR statues (the Lar being the
>household god that protects the family) for $19.00 for a *pair* of lar
>statues. They also have Penates plaques (the Penates are the household gods
>of prosperity) at a discount although I don't have the "liquidation" price
on --deletion--
>Email Sacred Source directly at: <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=061154020180082134015232190036129" >--------it@--------</a>
>Quite frankly I've not been impressed with Sacred Source recently.
Do they deliver on orders?
If you contact these folks please do express
>support for Roman statuary, and also mention Nova Roma by name!
Id faciam
If they close
>their Roman line there will be NO other source for Lar statues, Penates,
>Vesta images or the like in the entire world.
>
>OTHER NEWS:
>
>If you haven't visited the Pantheon section of the Nova Roma site in the
past
>few weeks, be sure to check out the new authentic ancient Roman prayers
which
>were recently posted. (I'm afraid I no longer remember who submitted them
to
>Germanicus for posting, my apologies!)
That was N. Moravius Vado, wasn't it?
>I've also heard from someone who is writing basic "how to" info about
setting
>up a home Lararium and beginning household worship. This is exciting stuff,
>since several folks have mentioned that they're not quite sure how to begin
>working with the daily rites which are already on the Religio pages of the
>Nova Roma site.
Yes, I am one of those Religio-impaired people. I'm looking forward to
reading more about this.
Valete
Gaius Marius Merullus
>Marcus Cassius Julianus
>Pontifex Maximus
>(posting on behalf of the Pontificial College)
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Religio News - Lar |
| From: |
Razenna razenna@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 1999 17:21:47 -0700 |
|
Ave, L. Equitius Cincinatus!
I would like to see your painted Penates plaque. Mine is still procreatinator brown.
Di Deaque ti bene ament.
Vale.
C. Aelius Ericius.
|
| Subject: |
Re: Holidays |
| From: |
Razenna razenna@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 1999 17:40:51 -0700 |
|
Hi, Crys!
I. I hope your eye is doing better. Di te semper servent.
II. Check out this calendar link:
<a href="http://www.clubs.psu.edu/aegsa/rome/romecal.html" target="_top" >http://www.clubs.psu.edu/aegsa/rome/romecal.html</a>
I got it off the Nova Roma lilnks section back in "The Old Days".
Ericius
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Has the Dictator Stepped Down? (etc) |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" germanicus@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 21:21:34 -0400 |
|
Salve,
> From: "Nicolaus Moravius" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=091089014007127031215056228219114187071048139" >n_moravius@--------</a>
>
> - now as I recall, Citizens, Germanicus announced an initial intention to
> step down at the Apollinarian Games; then later, he announced that he
would
> be continuing to serve until December. Some resultant confusion on the
part
You do not, in fact, recall correctly. I never indicated that I would be
stepping down in December (at least that _I_ can recall). I think that
started on the Britannia list, and just sort of stuck in folks' minds.
Vale,
Germanicus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Has the Dictator Stepped Down? (etc) |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" germanicus@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 21:28:35 -0400 |
|
Salve,
> From: "Nicolaus Moravius" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=091089014007127031215056228219114187071048139" >n_moravius@--------</a>
>
>
> - on or about 26 July (I have these extracts from forwarded text but
cannot
> locate the originals at present)the following was posted by Germanicus:
>
> ><AMPUTATIO>As legally appointed Dictator<AMPUTATIO>, I hereby assume the
> >office of curator araneum through the end of the year.>
> <AMPUTATIO>(I should say I intend to step down come December...)>
>
> - don't think I'm complaining that Germanicus has modified this decision:
no
> one can accuse him of inflexibility. I merely intended to point out that
> some of us found it all rather confusing.
Actually, that was referring to my intention to step down as curator araneum
come December (i.e., so the position could be filled in the December
elections). Apologies if I was less than clear. But, considering the whole
paragraph was talking about my role as curator araneum, I thought it would
have been a little silly to assume people would think I suddenly shifted
gears in a parenthetical aside at the end of the paragraph, and was suddenly
talking about my office of dictator.
Vale,
Germanicus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Holidays |
| From: |
"Don and Crys Meaker" famromo@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 5 Aug 1999 22:55:57 -0500 |
|
On 5 Aug 99, at 17:40, Razenna wrote:
>
> Hi, Crys!
>
> I. I hope your eye is doing better. Di te semper servent.
>
I thank you, but no it's no better. Don is searching for a proper
doctor for me. I am hoping it will just go away. Panic is a hobby
with me and so I have visions (no pun intended) of wearing a patch
(ick).
> II. Check out this calendar link:
> <a href="http://www.clubs.psu.edu/aegsa/rome/romecal.html" target="_top" >http://www.clubs.psu.edu/aegsa/rome/romecal.html</a>
> I got it off the Nova Roma lilnks section back in "The Old Days".
<G> I do believe this is exactly where I got my information. <G>
Amethystia Iunia Crystallina -- Iunonis Templique Sacerdote
<a href="http://famromo.wiccan.net/iuno" target="_top" >http://famromo.wiccan.net/iuno</a>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Holidays |
| From: |
"Darth Vilmur; Dark Lord of The Sith" darth_vilmur@-------- |
| Date: |
Thu, 05 Aug 1999 21:14:01 -0700 |
|
>
> I thank you, but no it's no better. Don is searching for a proper
> doctor for me. I am hoping it will just go away. Panic is a hobby
> with me and so I have visions (no pun intended) of wearing a patch
> (ick).
>
> no way patches are very cool.
but seriously, hope you have only success with your treatments
|
