Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	"Gaius Marius Merullus" rmerullo@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 00:25:23 -0400

Take a look at the album civium in the aerarium Saturni

:From: Daniel Dreesbach <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114212192056099202169102046248100208071048" >dreesbach@--------</a>
:
:How do we know which tribe we are with
:


Subject:	Re: Re: division.
From:
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 02:24:14 EDT

Salvete!
<shouting>
Another list? To what purpose? The mainlist is our forum, the plaza where
we Nova Romans speak our mind! This where we discuss history, Religio were
it deals with Politics and direction of the state. If someone attacks the
Tribune's politics let them. If some wants to make a joke about Rome having
war chariots, that Fabius missed the point about, let them! If the
supporters of Equitius want jab at Senator Vedius, let them! This is Rome!
You people who want nice packaged lists and no conflict, have not studied
Roman history. Legends have the founder of Rome fleeing conflict, brother
fighting brother over who will rule Rome, finally armed insurrection to find
the republic. If you are attacked, then defend yourself!! If you cannot,
perhaps you picked the wrong forum.
You people that are here for the Religio alone, sorry, since it is
intertwined with the State, there is always going to politics involved.
Other religions have their politics, but when we have ours, it becomes a
distraction and does not allow worship. Interesting. Do you not think the
Gods are aware of this? I'm sure Ivpiter Optimus Maximus, had to put up with
much politics during the existence of the Republic and the Principate. The
same with Vesta, Mars and the rest of Olympians. Are we so narrow minded
that we think we are the reason for the revival of the worship? No, we are
only the result, not the cause. The Gods again draw sustenance,
from not only from our individual prayers but from the state framework. And
as we become more practiced in our rituals, more polished in our requests,
the awareness will grow. The time is right. It's two years to the start of
the new 1000 years. It is time for the Olympians to return to the stage that
they were driven from in 391. Citizens of Rome, we are on the verge of a
great work.
Do not expect this work to be completed in a year or even two. Remember what
P. Vergilius Maro uttered: "tantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem."
(So vast a work it was to found the State of Rome) I think we should accept
this as our motto. Perhaps even as an inscription. So every time we are at
each other's throats, we must realize it is just another part of this "vast
work."
Valete!
Q. Fabius Maximus
Curule Aedile.


Subject:	Re: re: a needed division
From:
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 02:39:11 EDT

In a message dated 8/27/99 11:06:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
<a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a> writ--------br>
Salve,

Well, nobody told me _that_! Thanks for clarifying, Sulla:)....Any reason why
we can't use them anyway? Afterall they are there, w/NR citizens subscribed...
They may not be official yet...but perhaps they can get there if we use them.

Not sure how the 'Sanctioned List Lex' of Nova Roma goes, just trying to
clear the air as much as possible...Sulla, better ideas?

Respectfully,
Caesar

<< Just wanted to let everyone know those lists were not created....as far as
I
can remember by a Nova Roman Citizen. They were created by Tamale....an
occasional poster who was well....ousted from the list by P.Cassia when she
was list moderator. So they arent valid lists, by NR. :)

> Novaroma_Religion
> Novaroma_Government
> Novaroma_History
> Novaroma_Military
> Novaroma_Legions
> Novaroma_Literature >>


Subject:	Re: A needed division
From:	Mike Ma--------r <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=174176211056207031025158175026172165098048139046" >MikeMa--------r@--------</a>
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 03:02:40 -0400

Salvete omnes,

Merullus wrote,

>How about we all respect and tolerate each other, including our disparate
>interests and many faults?

>If we don't make some attempt to do that, they'll never be enough lists.
>Each of us will need his/her own list, to sit and engage in soliloquy,
>because after all we are all very different.

Hear, Hear!

I would add to this discussion that the separation between religion and
politics is a modernist idea. It's also illusory: every form of religious
group has an internal political life.

Magistrates as well as priests have religious responsibilities in the
religio romana, and political activity takes place under the auspices
(literally) and as an expression of the genius romae.

M. Mucius Scaevola Magister


Subject:	Re: re: a needed division
From:
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 03:28:18 EDT

In a message dated 8/27/99 11:52:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
<a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a> writ--------br>
Salve,

First off, as I said in my first post, I agree with Merullus...a single list
for NR is the absolute best way to go...But it would be nice to see a little
respect among fellow citizens. Ideally that would happen, but (again) I doubt
it.

Second, I've only been a citizen for so long, and I've seen this arguement
come up at least three times. Well that seems to me like an indication that
it is not going away...So instead of taking the hard nosed approach and
saying deal with it or you're not cut out for Roman life, we should make some
effort to fix it, regardless of wether or not a particular individual agrees.

Third, some of the folks are here only for the Religio, which is to be quite
expected. As I believe one of our Pontiffs said in so many words, Roman
Pagans have not many Spiritual Centers to turn to. So should we just say,
'well, if you don't want to participate in politics, then you can't worship
the Gods in our state,'? I don't think that would be very just, do you?
Rather we should except that some citizens may not want to participate, or
even hear about politics, and should provide a place, an official place for
them to exclusivly discuss the Religio. Some of us may enjoy the politics,
personal attacks and conflicts that go on at the main list...some may not.

Fourth, you make a good point Sulla, using these lists created by a
non-citizen is not the best of ideas. I will say that I was wrong there, and
that lists overseen by citizens is a far better, and indeed the only way to
go.

Fifth, The politics and Religion of Rome where always very closely
intertwined; and hence so are Nova Roma's. But it is my opinion that this
applies to those that wish to take up an active role in Nova Roman life...not
those private citizens who wish to have nothing to do with the Government,
and want only to practice their Religion with others who are also believers.
You _can_ have Religion without Government, but not Government without
Religion...Am I wrong?

Sixth, I will say again, _I_ like having one single list, in which _all_
aspects of Roman life are discussed; but I am not the only citizen in NR, and
am trying to make at least some sort of effort to assist those that are
unhappy with the situation. Just trying to be part of the solution...

Vale,
Caesar

<< Well personally I agree with Q.Fabius Maximus's speech....However, we do
have some unofficial lists available to us! However, I feel that if Civies
want to create lists...thats fine...but people who aren't Civies
well....personally I have issues against it...since it is using the Nova
Roma name....call me what you will...but like the website, I believe all
lists should be at least moderated if not created by a Nova Roma citizen.
>>


Subject:	Re: re: a needed division
From:	SFP55@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 03:51:41 EDT

In a message dated 8/28/1999 12:28:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=023056234037193209048149203140129208071" >BenBorgo@--------</--------; writes:
<< Second, I've only been a citizen for so long, and I've seen this argument
come up at least three times. Well, that seems to me like an indication that
it is not going away... Third, some of the folks are here only for the
Religio, which is to be quite expected. As I believe one of our Pontiffs said
in so many words, Roman
Pagans have not many Spiritual Centers to turn to. So should we just say,
'well, if you don't want to participate in politics, then you can't worship
the Gods in our state,' >>
Salve!

Well, I think citizens can practice their personal religion without the state
interfering.
However the state worship with its trappings is going to a different story.
There politics will always play a minor role. But then that is Roman.
Separation of church and state is a rather recent concept. 18th century I
believe.
Vale
Q. Fabius


Subject:	Re: a needed division
From:	Marius Fimbria legion6@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 06:30:42 -0500 (CDT)

Salvete omnes...

My concern about separate Lists (and one reason we didn't do that the
last couple of times it came up) is that a Citizen who subscribed to
some of them but not others might miss something vital...maybe that's
the obsessive-compulsive archivist in me speaking, but there it is.

However, if we *were* going to split off the various topics, I'd *darn*
sure rather moderate the cultural List than the political one!!
>({|;-P~~

As to Temale's Lists, hey...never turn down a good idea even if it
*did* come from your mother-in-law. They're there; we can use
'em...and if some silly person yanks 'em out from under us in a fit of
pique, well...we can create our own without having to worry anymore
about duplicating his, hmm?

All the same, I think I'd much rather see Nova Roma continue to gather
here in all its variety, and our Citizens increasing their stock of
comity and amity, open-mindedness and tolerance, such that we may enjoy
the finer rewards of civilized discourse.

(Knowing I'm no perfect example...but workin' on it)
************************************************************
Lucius Marius Fimbria |>[SPQR]<|
mka Märia Villarroel |\=/|
<a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a> ( ~ 6 )~~~----...,,__
Roman Historical Re-Creationist `\*/, ``}`^~``,,, \ \
and Citizen of Nova Roma ``=.\ (__==\_ /\ }
'Just a-hangin' around the Universe, | | / )\ \| /
bein' a Roman... It's hard work, _|_| / _/_| /`(
but SOMEbody's gotta do it!!' /./..=' /./..'


Subject:	Varia
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 08:50:03 -0400

A couple of items:

de sacerdotibus:

While I completely understand the various comments that have been made in
regards to 'sincere belief', another reason why I've brought up this entire
issue is because one gets 'centurial points' for holding such and the way
NovaRoma is set up, if one is a new citizen, holding a priesthood is pretty
much the only way to increase one's point total (or perhaps better: one's
auctoritas) ...

de listibus (!)

As someone who is a veteran of quite a few lists (I currently subscribe to
well over a hundred of them), let me suggest that you *don't* split off
into a number of other lists. The bickering here is really small potatoes
compared to most that I've had experience with (although it would be an
interesting addition to the annals if 'sources of inimicitia' between folks
were listed for new cives). But splitting up of lists that are primarily
for discussion, which this one is, tends to kill off discussion on *all*
the lists. I signed up for the NovaRoma lit list and it is stunningly
quiet, e.g.. (I signed up for a bunch of others, but apparently was not
approved vel simm.).

That said, if there were to be set up some 'officially sanctioned' NovaRoma
'other lists', a prerequisite of joining them should be active membership
in this list (by active I simply mean that you can't set your subscription
to this one to 'no mail' simply to get to the others. They should also be
unlisted onelist lists, and only advertised here and in the welcome
message when one joins (i.e. not on the website).

de mysteriis

Today would be the second day for those desiring to be initiated into the
mysteries of Eleusis. Yesterday would have involved registration ... today
would be devoted to purification, both of initiates and the little piglet
they would be sacrificing. This involved an eight mile trek from Athens to
the Piraeus (or Phaleron) where initiates would (along with their piglet)
and bathe in the sea (the piglet was something one received for paying the
15 drachma initiation fee). Later, back in Athens the piglet would be
sacrificed and subsequently there'd be a major feast ...

mpj
]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: A needed division
From:	Kyrene Ariadne kyreneariadne@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 06:09:58 -0700 (PDT)

--- Dean Troy <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114056113185089095081021203102129208071" >dean6886@--------</a> --------e:
> I think it's about time we think of starting a new list ---- an
> official Nova Roma list dedicated only to the religious and social
> interaction aspects of our society. We can leave this list for
> everything political-- election campaigns, reform ideas, political
> disputes, etc.etc. To be frank, there are some people here that have no
> interest in the political process whatsoever just as there are many
> people who don't vote in public elections in their country of origin.
> There are also people here on the other hand that love Nova Roma
> politics and are here solely because of this. Then there are those like
> me who worship the Gods and Goddesses and yet still enjoy the politics
> of this organization, along with some of the other kinds of information.

Pythia already runs such a list, and I am on it.

It's at <a href="http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/religio" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/religio</a>

Vale et khaire,

-Kyrinia

===
-=* Kyrene Ariadne/Lolandrea Psikine'Aelanar *=-
-=* O'mra AirgeadFaol/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 *=-
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	Lists, Politics and Religion
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" n_moravius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 06:08:25 PDT

Salvete!

Scripsit imprimis Gn. Tarq. Caesar:

>First off, I completely agree with Merullus; if we _all_ could manage to
>show a little comraderie, respect, etc., all the things Nova Romans
>_should_ be considering in their posts, there would be no need for any
>other lists. I venture to say this one would become even more active if we
>could just be civil, and fair to one another.

- concino. Sed item, sic clamavit Q. Fab. Maximus:

><shouting>
>Another list? To what purpose? The mainlist is our forum, the plaza where
>we Nova Romans speak our mind! This where we discuss history, Religio were
>it deals with Politics and direction of the state. If someone attacks the
>Tribune's politics let them. If some wants to make a joke about Rome
>having
>war chariots, that Fabius missed the point about, let them! If the
>supporters of Equitius want jab at Senator Vedius, let them!

- and the rest. Again I agree. But it's all about _how_ one does these
things... et iterum Maximus:

>This is Rome!
>You people who want nice packaged lists and no conflict, have not studied
>Roman history. Legends have the founder of Rome fleeing conflict, brother
>fighting brother over who will rule Rome, finally armed insurrection to
>find
>the republic. If you are attacked, then defend yourself!! If you cannot,
>perhaps you picked the wrong forum.

- though one sometimes wonders, sometimes, from what gets underfoot, whether
has wandered into the Forum Boarium by mistake...

>You people that are here for the Religio alone, sorry, since it is
>intertwined with the State, there is always going to politics involved.

- you are talking sense, sententiae meae, Maxime...

><AMPUTATIO> Do you not think the
>Gods are aware of this? I'm sure Ivpiter Optimus Maximus, had to put up
>with
>much politics during the existence of the Republic and the Principate. The
>same with Vesta, Mars and the rest of Olympians. Are we so narrow minded
>that we think we are the reason for the revival of the worship? No, we are
>only the result, not the cause. The Gods again draw sustenance,
>from not only from our individual prayers but from the state framework.

- exactly. ACCURATISSIMUS!

>And
>as we become more practiced in our rituals, more polished in our requests,
>the awareness will grow. The time is right. It's two years to the start
>of
>the new 1000 years. It is time for the Olympians to return to the stage
>that
>they were driven from in 391.

- Ita! I've had this feeling for three or four years, now, myself. It's SO
refreshing to hear from other people! Gratias ago tibi, Maxime!

> Citizens of Rome, we are on the verge of a
>great work.
>Do not expect this work to be completed in a year or even two. Remember
>what
>P. Vergilius Maro uttered: "tantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem."
>(So vast a work it was to found the State of Rome) I think we should accept
>this as our motto. Perhaps even as an inscription. So every time we are
>at
>each other's throats, we must realize it is just another part of this "vast
>work."

- this is, I think, a very profound concept. On a (metaphysical)principle of
sympathetic vibration, you become what you think about. You are what you
process. You put a sign up, saying "Romans Welcome", and you can't complain
after when you find the Flamen Dialis borrowing your barbeque for a
sacrifice, Julius Caesar in the shower and Cinna and Brutus handing out
your kitchen knives...

Seriously...

>I feel that if Civies
>want to create lists...thats fine...but people who aren't Civies
>well....personally I have issues against it...since it is using the Nova
>Roma name....call me what you will...but like the website, I believe all
>lists should be at least moderated if not created by a Nova Roma citizen.

- I'd call you a sensible fellow for contributing that, Sulla. Just this
once, mind ;-)

Et postremo, sic M. Mucius Scaevola Magister:

>I would add to this discussion that the separation between religion and
>politics is a modernist idea. It's also illusory: every form of religious
>group has an internal political life.

- indeed: and (in my view) non-religious politics is simply the religion of
the non-religious. It's all about eudaimonia, spiritual or secular. As far
as I am aware, Rome was the only political state with an integral, official
religion which also tolerated other forms of religious belief and practice
(as long as the toleration was reciprocal).

Valete bene in operibus Novae Romae,

N. Moravius Vado.


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 09:55:56 -0400

At 08:29 AM 8/27/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Quaeritur:
>
>Is it 'practical and acceptable' in this age to believe that someone
>applying, e.g., to the position of pontiff, would have sincere religious
>feeling for 'the deity' (which deity is it that a pontifex is devoted to?
>what deity is an augur devoted to). Indeed, was it 'practical and
>acceptable' in ancient Rome (as far as I'm aware, e.g., for most of the
>period of the Republic, the positions of pontiff and augur were as much
>matters of politics as religion (if not more))? I can't help but be
>reminded of Cicero's famous quip about wondering how two augures could pass
>each other on the street without laughing.

I don't see where that's a problem. Some of us do follow the path of the
Romans as our chosen religion. I realize that ancient Romans used
priesthoods as political and social stepping stones, there's no reason why
we must do so, ourselves. As reconstuctionists, we choose which aspects of
ancient tradition to emulate and which to abandon. I'd like to be a part
of a Nova Roma which selects the best aspects of ancient Rome to recreate;
not one which uses tradition as an excuse. Don't we study history to learn
from the mistakes made by our predecessors?

>And here's something else -- I'm
>sure there are plenty of learned folks on this list who do know quite a bit
>about ancient religion who also happen to be Christian or Muslim (and whose
>employment might actually depend on genuine sincere belief in the message
>of those religions) and who could be quite effective at performing rituals
>and instructing others in the same; but such knowledge will go to waste
>with the 'sincere' requirement. Is that 'practical'?

Here, I believe you are wrong. In order for a ritual to be performed
correctly, the celebrant *must* have a sincere belief in what he is doing.
We might not know the difference, but the gods will. Their favor comes to
us only as a result of appropriate piety, and I don't think that will come
merely from going through the motions.

>We don't expect the milites among us to actually go out and kill people.
>Our political functionaries have no 'real' power in this world. Heck, I
>suspect most of the folks around here don't appear to know Latin to any
>conversational degree. When I go to the chat room, I don't actually get a
>cup of Falernian (heck, I seem to keep missing everyone). I'm also 99%
>positive that none of our pontifices has ever presided over an actual
>sacrifice -- whether as a pontifex or a privatus, which to me (and, indeed,
>to the Romans) would have been one of the signs of 'sincere belief'.

I beg to differ; I have performed sacrifices many times. While none of
them have involved blood sacrifices, I would love to do one some day.

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Repost of Ianus question
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 10:37:58 -0400

I had asked if anyone had seen this post when I had sent it back on July 31
-- no one responded, but someone asked me to repost it:

I have a question I've been trying to answer for some time about Ianus and
how he seems to be associated with water. It began when I was explaining
at a workshop how the doors of the Temple of Ianus Geminus were left opened
during times of war and closed only during periods of Pax Romana. Someone
asked me why, and I didn't know the answer. Upon thinking about it, the
opposite made more sense to me, so I began trying to find out why.

A couple sources I have explain that during a war with Titus Tatius, an
inexplicable gush of hot water came out of the door, pushing back the enemy
and allowing the Romans to successfully defend their city. I'm not even
sure who Titus Tatius was or what time period this may have been, except
that it had to have been before 179 BCE when the shrine was moved. The
only reference I find to one with that name refers to the Sabine king of
Cures who captured Rome and later ruled along with Romulus -- could this
really be the same person?? Nor have I seen any citations to primary
sources referencing this anecdote (although that's probably just because I
don't have them at hand).

Moreover, in Scullard's _History of the Roman World_, there is a footnote
about Ianus citing L.A. Holland's _Janus and the Bridge_ in which he argues
that Ianus was a numen attached to water-crossings. Another author
explains the Temple of Ianus Geminus door opening/closing by associating
Ianus with bridges; the bridge was removed during times of war and replaced
during times of peace. Again, I find no citations to primary sources to
back this up (of course, I do not have copies of the books from which this
information is culled), so I'm still skeptical.

I'm hoping that someone reading this list will have better knowledge of
primary sources than I do and will be able to steer me in the right
directions to investigate this association, or a better knowledge of
history than I do who can give me a better reference to the war with Titus
Tatius.
Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
Teacher, writer, secretary, and *still* Friend of Cows


Subject:	Re: Re-Enactment
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 10:43:52 -0400

At 11:54 AM 8/27/99 -0400, you wrote:
>So far I only have a very few (4) who are interested in coming to an NE
>event at Foxwoods in the winter and I really have no Imerium to go
>further with the project.without some additional support. Would anyone
>be interested in hiring a local hall, staying in a local motel and
>having a two day do-it-yourself program as probably the least expensive
>way to meet? My wife and I would be pleased to offer a potluck main
>course, vegetable, soft drinks (BYOB) and desert for Saturday Evening
>Also if anyone else has a better idea, I would be interested to hear it.

Keep me informed! I'd love to come, and I could probably put up a person
or two (I just have a 1-bedroom apartment) in Providence, if anyone is
interested.

BTW, who else is in New England? I think we really should be getting
together with others who are close by whenever possible, and even form
local tribes. Anyone else for a get-together?

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: re: a needed division
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 10:46:29 -0400

At 05:55 AM 8/28/99 -0000, you wrote:
>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=014056234254193209048149203140129208071" >benborgo@--------</--------;
>
> Now hopefully those that have been complaining about the contents on this
list will set an example and start posting on these other lists. All are
based in the onelist system...
>
>Novaroma_Religion
>Novaroma_Government
>Novaroma_History
>Novaroma_Military
>Novaroma_Legions
>Novaroma_Literature

Are these all on One_List? Perhaps someone could post a link to the
subscription site for those who aren't familiar with it?

>And of couse the ViaTrames for our very informal Social interaction...

What is this?

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Kyrene Ariadne kyreneariadne@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 08:14:38 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete!

--- Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a> wrote:
> >And here's something else -- I'm
> >sure there are plenty of learned folks on this list who do know quite a bit
> >about ancient religion who also happen to be Christian or Muslim (and whose
> >employment might actually depend on genuine sincere belief in the message
> >of those religions) and who could be quite effective at performing rituals
> >and instructing others in the same; but such knowledge will go to waste
> >with the 'sincere' requirement. Is that 'practical'?

<sarcasm>

Goody; I'll just run right on over to the Southern Baptist church and get
myself ordained, then.

</sarcasm>

> Here, I believe you are wrong. In order for a ritual to be performed
> correctly, the celebrant *must* have a sincere belief in what he is doing.
> We might not know the difference, but the gods will. Their favor comes to
> us only as a result of appropriate piety, and I don't think that will come
> merely from going through the motions.

Agreed.

I think that others wanting to become priests in our religion when they're
*not* of our religion is ludicrous and foolish. I wouldn't dream of invading
some church and yelling at them to ordain me when I'm Pagan; I don't think it
should be the other way around, either.

Realizing that we are one in the face of diversity is a beautiful thing, but
making just anyone a priest regardless of their faith is not a good practice.

Valete et khairete,

-Andrea Gladia Kyrinia

===
-=* Kyrene Ariadne/Lolandrea Psikine'Aelanar *=-
-=* O'mra AirgeadFaol/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 *=-
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	Re: Re: A needed division
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 13:57:31 EDT

Salve Gaius Marius,

That was well said. I agree completely. I even tolerate the nameless one
who can't read my name and can't identify my email address when it's
posted. That's pretty tolerant, I think.

;-)

Vale

L. Sergius Aust.

>From: "Gaius Marius Merullus" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a>
>
>Salvete Caie Druse et alii
>
>How about we all respect and tolerate each other, including our disparate
>interests and many faults?
>
>If we don't make some attempt to do that, they'll never be enough lists.
>Each of us will need his/her own list, to sit and engage in soliloquy,
>because after all we are all very different.
>
>Valete
>
>Gaius Marius Merullus

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


Subject:	Re: Re: division.
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 13:57:38 EDT

Salvete omnes,

Another cogent post!! I am forced to horrify Quintus Fabius by agreeing
with him. I was wondering when someone was going to point out that our
predecessors in Roma Antiqua were constantly slandering, fighting, and
often murdering each other, so the tradition is certainly well-preserved
in Nova Roma.

I do think we should set the limits a little more tightly than did the
earlier Romans. No murder or other physical violence, no unreasoning
attacks on others just because we disagree with them, no attempts to
silence dissension unless the list Praetor (or whatever it is now)
decides it's out of hand.

However, I think it is in the nature of existence that unless there is
conflict there is no progress. If everybody is sitting around here in
perfect harmony, mutually masturbating each others' egos, then Nova Roma
is as good as dead.

Vale,

L. Sergius Aust.

>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------;
>
>Salvete!
><shouting>
>Another list? To what purpose? The mainlist is our forum, the plaza where
>we Nova Romans speak our mind! This where we discuss history, Religio were
>it deals with Politics and direction of the state. If someone attacks the
>Tribune's politics let them. If some wants to make a joke about Rome having
>war chariots, that Fabius missed the point about, let them! If the
>supporters of Equitius want jab at Senator Vedius, let them! This is Rome!
>You people who want nice packaged lists and no conflict, have not studied
>Roman history. Legends have the founder of Rome fleeing conflict, brother
>fighting brother over who will rule Rome, finally armed insurrection to find
>the republic. If you are attacked, then defend yourself!! If you cannot,
>perhaps you picked the wrong forum.
>You people that are here for the Religio alone, sorry, since it is
>intertwined with the State, there is always going to politics involved.
>Other religions have their politics, but when we have ours, it becomes a
>distraction and does not allow worship. Interesting. Do you not think the
>Gods are aware of this? I'm sure Ivpiter Optimus Maximus, had to put up
>with
>much politics during the existence of the Republic and the Principate. The
>same with Vesta, Mars and the rest of Olympians. Are we so narrow minded
>that we think we are the reason for the revival of the worship? No, we are
>only the result, not the cause. The Gods again draw sustenance,
>from not only from our individual prayers but from the state framework. And
>as we become more practiced in our rituals, more polished in our requests,
>the awareness will grow. The time is right. It's two years to the start of
>the new 1000 years. It is time for the Olympians to return to the stage
>that
>they were driven from in 391. Citizens of Rome, we are on the verge of a
>great work.
>Do not expect this work to be completed in a year or even two. Remember
>what
>P. Vergilius Maro uttered: "tantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem."
>(So vast a work it was to found the State of Rome) I think we should accept
>this as our motto. Perhaps even as an inscription. So every time we are at
>each other's throats, we must realize it is just another part of this "vast
>work."
>Valete!
>Q. Fabius Maximus
>Curule Aedile.

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 13:57:41 EDT

Salve I. Ovidia,

>From: Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
>
[SNIP!]
>>And here's something else -- I'm
>>sure there are plenty of learned folks on this list who do know quite a bit
>>about ancient religion who also happen to be Christian or Muslim (and whose
>>employment might actually depend on genuine sincere belief in the message
>>of those religions) and who could be quite effective at performing rituals
>>and instructing others in the same; but such knowledge will go to waste
>>with the 'sincere' requirement. Is that 'practical'?
>
>Here, I believe you are wrong. In order for a ritual to be performed
>correctly, the celebrant *must* have a sincere belief in what he is doing.
>We might not know the difference, but the gods will. Their favor comes to
>us only as a result of appropriate piety, and I don't think that will come
>merely from going through the motions.
>
I wonder if this is true. If it is, then certainly the majority of
religious rituals that are performed world-wide are done incorrectly,
because it is clear that the majority of rank-and-file religious
practitioners haven't a clue as to the significance of what they're
doing, let alone a sincere belief in it -- at least the many I've
encountered over many years.

I think religious ritual is closely akin to the practice of "magic"
rituals, where the belief is that there is a causal relationship between
doing act A and producing result B. It is like the "ritual" I perform
each evening when I need light -- I engage in a set sequence of motor
activity, generally involving moving a small lever, and my vicinity is
illuminated. I don't have to know how or why it happens as long as I
perform the act correctly. That's no different, really, from those who
rub oil on a statue to have their tumors go away. It would seem awfully
primitive and unrealistic to assert that the Deity who heals needed its
statue oiled.

The connection between the awareness of, and relation to, Diety (what I
think D. Lucianus Dex. has previously described as "the Divine") and the
practice of religion (which, after all, is a human creation) is hard to
pin down. I once had a (sadly brief) conversation with the son of the
Mahatma Ghandi in which we agreed that if you really love and serve God
(or Diety or the Divine), then it's really hard to be a part of any
organized religion, at least to the extent that that means just reciting
doctrines and performing rituals.

>>We don't expect the milites among us to actually go out and kill people.
>>Our political functionaries have no 'real' power in this world. Heck, I
>>suspect most of the folks around here don't appear to know Latin to any
>>conversational degree. When I go to the chat room, I don't actually get a
>>cup of Falernian (heck, I seem to keep missing everyone). I'm also 99%
>>positive that none of our pontifices has ever presided over an actual
>>sacrifice -- whether as a pontifex or a privatus, which to me (and, indeed,
>>to the Romans) would have been one of the signs of 'sincere belief'.
>
>I beg to differ; I have performed sacrifices many times. While none of
>them have involved blood sacrifices, I would love to do one some day.
>
Hmmm. Remind me never to go out for an evening alone with you! :-)

Vale,

L. Sergius Aust.

in ullam rem ne properemus.

(Let's not rush into anything.)


Subject:	Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 13:57:45 EDT

Salve Flavius Vedius,

I really don't want to carry on an extended debate on this and, in fact,
this will probably be my last post on the subject. So you can reply again
and have the last word if it means so much to you.

The facts (as I see them) are:

That you were a founder, a Consul, and a Censor for the first year of
Nova Roma, and (for whatever reason) you failed to set up the tribes and
centuries during the year that it was your duty to do so;

That your successors in the office of Censor also failed to carry out
that duty during their watches;

That all of you failed to respond to requests, pleas, demands, and
complaints from a wide variety of magistrates and common citizens who
recognized that the carrying out of this task was essential to even
having a Nova Roma;

That it was ONLY after Lucius Equitius Cinncinatus sought to find a way
to FORCE your friend to do his duty, that the group of you were moved to
take actions that eventually led to you straightening out (we hope) the
mess in which you originally left Nova Roman government.

Therefore, in mea sentatio, while you certainly deserve credit for doing
the job (albeit so belatedly that the very existence of the State was
endangered by your negligence), Cinncinatus deserves the thanks of all of
Nova Roma for motivating you to finally do the job.

Without Cinncinatus' actions, there would have been no dictatorship, no
tribes, no centuries, no new Constitution, and ultimately no Nova Roma.
Those are the facts as they appear obvious to me. I regret that this
opinion seems to make me persona non grata in your eyes, but truth and
honesty take priority with me.

Vale et bona fortuna,

L. Sergius Aust.

>From: "Flavius Vedius Germa--------s" <a href="/post/--------roma?protectID=123056091213158116036102228219114090071048139" >germa--------s@--------</a> >
>Salve,
>
>> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>>
>> Vedius' new constitution may prove more workable than his old one, and it
>> is certainly laudable that he finally completed the allocation of
>> citizens to tribes and centuries (thanks in no small measure to Lucius
>> Equitius Cinncinatus).
>
>Actually, it was in no measure "thanks" to Cincinnatus. He had absolutely
>zero to do with the allocation of citizens to the tribes and centuries. He
>may very well have done some work in this area, but if he did, he decided
>not to share it with anyone in the government, leaving us to have to do it
>all from scratch. Thanks for nothing...
>
>Vale,
>
>Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
>Censor

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


Subject:	Re: Re: A needed division
From:	Exitil@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 14:31:40 EDT

<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------; writes:

> That was well said. I agree completely. I even tolerate the nameless one
> who can't read my name and can't identify my email address when it's
> posted. That's pretty tolerant, I think.
>
> ;-)
>
> Vale

Eh? I'm sorry but this seems a little negative and I havent done anything to
you. If its not negative please correct me. I was trying to find who you
were because I saw a quote from you but it didnt show email and I wanted to
contact you. Since I usually delete the majority of posts without reading
them, I didnt have your email handy so I asked others if they knew.

-Alex Novus


Subject:	Re: Cincinnatus and the Tribes
From:	Cassius622@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 14:34:33 EDT

Salvete,

I'm afraid that the other, unmentioned facts of the Tribes and Centuries
problems hardly leave Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus a hero...

1. Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus was informed by the Censors in January of this
year that they could not get to the job within a reasonable amount of time.
They made a request that the task be brought before the Senate and/or given
over to a Committee.

2. Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus instead took on the job himself. He did not
give the situation over to the Senate, nor did he call any sort of Committee
to work on the Tribes and Centuries.

3. Due to some of the same reasons why the Censors were having a problem,
Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus was unable to form the Tribes and Centuries
*either*.

4. Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus then sat on the situation for four whole
months, doing nothing. He did not do the Tribes and Centuries as he promised.
Nor did he at any time turn the situation over to the Senate or appoint some
sort of Committee as the Censors had requested. Instead he allowed the
situation to fester... with the Citizens becoming more enraged by the day.

5. The Censors, after working some months to correct the basic difficulties
to forming the Tribes and Centuries, (online Citizenship application
problems, Citizen list problems, etc.) were finally able to do the job. They
took back the project from Cincinnatus since he had done nothing from
February till May of this year.

6. While the process of the assigning the Tribes and Centuries was being
done, Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus began Impeachment proceedings against the
Censors, for not doing the job.

7. The Social Wars ensued.

8. Flavius Vedius Germanicus took up the Censor position vacated by Marcus
Cassius Julianus during the Dictatorship. He decided to rework the done by
the Censors already, and came up with a new set of assignments. Since during
the Dictatorship no one was able to interfere with the process actually
*being* completed, the job was finished. Germanicus did a better job at it
too, since he had a far better grasp of the Tribes and Centuries than either
myself of Decius Iunius Palladius.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

In a message dated 8/28/99 1:58:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------; writes:

<<
The facts (as I see them) are:

That you were a founder, a Consul, and a Censor for the first year of
Nova Roma, and (for whatever reason) you failed to set up the tribes and
centuries during the year that it was your duty to do so;

That your successors in the office of Censor also failed to carry out
that duty during their watches;

That all of you failed to respond to requests, pleas, demands, and
complaints from a wide variety of magistrates and common citizens who
recognized that the carrying out of this task was essential to even
having a Nova Roma;

That it was ONLY after Lucius Equitius Cinncinatus sought to find a way
to FORCE your friend to do his duty, that the group of you were moved to
take actions that eventually led to you straightening out (we hope) the
mess in which you originally left Nova Roman government.

Therefore, in mea sentatio, while you certainly deserve credit for doing
the job (albeit so belatedly that the very existence of the State was
endangered by your negligence), Cinncinatus deserves the thanks of all of
Nova Roma for motivating you to finally do the job.

Without Cinncinatus' actions, there would have been no dictatorship, no
tribes, no centuries, no new Constitution, and ultimately no Nova Roma.
Those are the facts as they appear obvious to me. I regret that this
opinion seems to make me persona non grata in your eyes, but truth and
honesty take priority with me.
>>


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 14:35:51 -0400

At 01:57 PM 8/28/99 EDT, you wrote:
>I think religious ritual is closely akin to the practice of "magic"
>rituals, where the belief is that there is a causal relationship between
>doing act A and producing result B. It is like the "ritual" I perform
>each evening when I need light -- I engage in a set sequence of motor
>activity, generally involving moving a small lever, and my vicinity is
>illuminated. I don't have to know how or why it happens as long as I
>perform the act correctly. That's no different, really, from those who
>rub oil on a statue to have their tumors go away. It would seem awfully
>primitive and unrealistic to assert that the Deity who heals needed its
>statue oiled.

This is but one kind of magic. I'm not sure I go in for it, personally. I
believe that the Roman gods (or "the Divine," if you prefer) have
accumulations of power/numen (again, whatever term you prefer) which humans
do not. They may or may not choose to use their unique abilities on behalf
of humans whose piety pleases and increases their own numen/power. The
most common kind of Roman sacrifice was do ust des ("I give so that you may
give") and one formula I've seen as part of Roman prayers is macte esto
("Be thou increased/honored"). I think that establishing a relationship
with the gods/Divine is essential if this is your spiritual path. Someone
who is better versed in theology could use the proper terminology, but I
think we're talking about the difference between thaumaturgy and
theo-(something). Help?

>The connection between the awareness of, and relation to, Diety (what I
>think D. Lucianus Dex. has previously described as "the Divine") and the
>practice of religion (which, after all, is a human creation) is hard to
>pin down. I once had a (sadly brief) conversation with the son of the
>Mahatma Ghandi in which we agreed that if you really love and serve God
>(or Diety or the Divine), then it's really hard to be a part of any
>organized religion, at least to the extent that that means just reciting
>doctrines and performing rituals.

Why does being part of an organized religion necessitate merely reciting
doctrines and performing rituals? I can't see why being truly devoted to a
god/the Divine wouldn't bring more meaning to rituals.

>>I beg to differ; I have performed sacrifices many times. While none of
>>them have involved blood sacrifices, I would love to do one some day.
>>
>Hmmm. Remind me never to go out for an evening alone with you! :-)

Perhaps you misunderstand what I mean by blood sacrifice. :-)

I think it'd be great to ritually sacrifice a small animal which has been
raised for consumption -- it's going to be slaughtered; why not do so
reverently and offer a portion to the gods? Any living (or formerly
living) thing contains a certain degree of numen/power, presumably, animate
ones more than inanimate. The organs with the most numen/power were
considered by the ancients to be the heart and liver, which is why those
organs were sacrificed to the gods. 99% of the time, the rest of the
animal was cooked and eaten by the celebrants. Sounds like a great excuse
for an old-fashioned pig roast to me. :-)

Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
Teacher, writer, secretary, and *still* Friend of Cows


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	SFP55@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:31:06 EDT

In a message dated 8/28/1999 11:38:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a> wr--------:

<< I think it'd be great to ritually sacrifice a small animal which has been
raised for consumption -- it's going to be slaughtered; why not do so
reverently and offer a portion to the gods? Any living (or formerly
living) thing contains a certain degree of numen/power, presumably, animate
ones more than inanimate. The organs with the most numen/power were
considered by the ancients to be the heart and liver, which is why those
organs were sacrificed to the gods. 99% of the time, the rest of the
animal was cooked and eaten by the celebrants. Sounds like a great excuse
for an old-fashioned pig roast to me. :-)>>

The problem we have here in the modern world, is sacrifice. The word means
"to give up." If I'm really thirsty, I have a coke in my hand, and I pour it
on the ground, I sacrifice personally. I'm giving something up, something
that would have eased my discomfort. If you slaughter a pig, but are well
fed when you do it, or so rich that its loss doesn't bother you in the least,
what are you scarificing? (Except you have to clean up the mess.)
State sacrifice was simular. The reason why the hoofs and horns were
dedicated to the God and the carcuss burned was symbolic. By rendering the
beast unconsumable, the worshipers are "giving up" the chance to eat the
beast.


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	JSA varromurena@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 12:47:29 -0700 (PDT)

--- <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------; wrote:
> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------;
>
> In a message dated 8/28/1999 11:38:04 AM Pacific
> Daylight Time,
> <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a> wr--------:
>
> << I think it'd be great to ritually sacrifice a
> small animal which has been
> raised for consumption -- it's going to be
> slaughtered; why not do so
> reverently and offer a portion to the gods? Any
> living (or formerly
> living) thing contains a certain degree of
> numen/power, presumably, animate
> ones more than inanimate. The organs with the most
> numen/power were
> considered by the ancients to be the heart and
> liver, which is why those
> organs were sacrificed to the gods. 99% of the
> time, the rest of the
> animal was cooked and eaten by the celebrants.
> Sounds like a great excuse
> for an old-fashioned pig roast to me. :-)>>
>
> The problem we have here in the modern world, is
> sacrifice. The word means
> "to give up." If I'm really thirsty, I have a coke
> in my hand, and I pour it
> on the ground, I sacrifice personally. I'm giving
> something up, something
> that would have eased my discomfort. If you
> slaughter a pig, but are well
> fed when you do it, or so rich that its loss doesn't
> bother you in the least,
> what are you scarificing? (Except you have to clean
> up the mess.)
> State sacrifice was simular. The reason why the
> hoofs and horns were
> dedicated to the God and the carcuss burned was
> symbolic. By rendering the
> beast unconsumable, the worshipers are "giving up"
> the chance to eat the
> beast.

Then why is it that the sources we have indicate the
meat was in fact eaten by the worshippers, something
like a BBQ at the God's House? The animal was
slaughtered, roasted on an altar, ritually presented
to the god, then eaten by the worshippers. Its a
sacrifice because sheep, goats, pigs and cows produce
valuable stuff (or provide valuable services) other
than meat to those who keep them, in an era when few
domestic animals existed. Over the course of time,
want became tradition, even for those with wealth.

L. Licinius Varro Murena
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	Sacrifices (was Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum)
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 16:32:52 -0400

I don't know of any instances where only the undesireable portions of a
beast were given to the gods, while humans consumed the rest. The *did*
however, give some of the internal organs to the gods, for reasons I
already explained -- hearts, livers, and kidneys were considered to be the
most "lively" part of an animal and thus the most potent portions to be
given away. There were rare occasions where an entire beast was
sacrifeced, to be entirely burnt and thus consumed by the gods, but it
didn't happen very often.

You are correct, I think, that the modern day definition of "sacrifice" is
to give something up, but I don't think our definition is the same as the
ancients'. What was meaningful to them might not be for us, and vice
versa. We hear a lot about the emptiness of ancient Roman religion;
however, I think Romans were onto a good thing until they became so
"civilized" and the State took over the religion. I'd like to study it
more and learn from the mistakes they made which caused the State Religion
to become so empty for so many.

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Richard K. Persky ouroboros@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 16:18:10 -0500

On 8/28/99 2:31 PM, <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------; <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------; wrote:

>The problem we have here in the modern world, is sacrifice. The word means
>"to give up." If I'm really thirsty, I have a coke in my hand, and I pour
>it on the ground, I sacrifice personally.

I probably shouldn't jump directly from lurking into a discussion of
a subject as volatile as religion, particularly as I'm not even a citizen
yet, but... doesn't "sacrifice" ultimately derive from "sacrum facere" --
to make sacred?

>If you slaughter a pig, but are well fed when you do it, or so rich that its
loss
>doesn't bother you in the least, what are you scarificing?

You are sharing a meal with the gods -- the smoke wafts up to the
heavens for the gods to enjoy, and the worshippers each get some of the
meat; thus, you are sacrificing(=making holy) the animal by giving it to
the gods, and if you want to get a bit more figurative, you are also
making yourself and your fellow-worshippers holy, by dining with the
gods. (I'd wish I could claim credit for that insight, but I can't; it
was in a class lecture on Greek religion. I'd be very surprised if the
Romans differed much on this point.)

Richard
(just another barbarian, but working on it)


Subject:	Re: Re: A needed division
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 17:36:41 EDT

Salve Alex Novus,

All right then, I apologize for being irritated. It hadn't occurred to me
that you might be looking at a quotation within someone else's message.
As they say, "My bad."

Vale,

L. Sergius Aust

>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=113082020165082153015098190036129" >Exitil@--------</--------;
>
><--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------; writes:
>
>> That was well said. I agree completely. I even tolerate the nameless one
>> who can't read my name and can't identify my email address when it's
>> posted. That's pretty tolerant, I think.
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>> Vale
>
>Eh? I'm sorry but this seems a little negative and I havent done anything
>to
>you. If its not negative please correct me. I was trying to find who you
>were because I saw a quote from you but it didnt show email and I wanted to
>contact you. Since I usually delete the majority of posts without reading
>them, I didnt have your email handy so I asked others if they knew.
>
>-Alex Novus

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


Subject:	Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Ira Adams iadams@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 16:37:17 -0500

Antonius Gryllus Graecus wrote:

>If you don't believe, please go away.

To which Lucius Sergius Australicus replies:

No, thank you.


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 10:55:24 -0400

A good place to find all the refs you need (and probably the answer to your
question) is the relevant entry in Platner's Topographical Dictionary. If
you go to:

<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>
2&object=312

... and scroll down a bit, you'll read the entry on Ianus Geminus (it does
spill over to the next page).

Note that the above url will probably get cut in half, so depending on your
browser you might have to reconstruct it ...

At 10:37 AM 28/08/1999 -0400, you wrote:
From: Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>

I had asked if anyone had seen this post when I had sent it back on July 31
-- no one responded, but someone asked me to repost it:

I have a question I've been trying to answer for some time about Ianus and
how he seems to be associated with water. It began when I was explaining
at a workshop how the doors of the Temple of Ianus Geminus were left opened
during times of war and closed only during periods of Pax Romana. Someone
asked me why, and I didn't know the answer. Upon thinking about it, the
opposite made more sense to me, so I began trying to find out why.

A couple sources I have explain that during a war with Titus Tatius, an
inexplicable gush of hot water came out of the door, pushing back the enemy
and allowing the Romans to successfully defend their city. I'm not even
sure who Titus Tatius was or what time period this may have been, except
that it had to have been before 179 BCE when the shrine was moved. The
only reference I find to one with that name refers to the Sabine king of
Cures who captured Rome and later ruled along with Romulus -- could this
really be the same person?? Nor have I seen any citations to primary
sources referencing this anecdote (although that's probably just because I
don't have them at hand).

Moreover, in Scullard's _History of the Roman World_, there is a footnote
about Ianus citing L.A. Holland's _Janus and the Bridge_ in which he argues
that Ianus was a numen attached to water-crossings. Another author
explains the Temple of Ianus Geminus door opening/closing by associating
Ianus with bridges; the bridge was removed during times of war and replaced
during times of peace. Again, I find no citations to primary sources to
back this up (of course, I do not have copies of the books from which this
information is culled), so I'm still skeptical.

I'm hoping that someone reading this list will have better knowledge of
primary sources than I do and will be able to steer me in the right
directions to investigate this association, or a better knowledge of
history than I do who can give me a better reference to the war with Titus
Tatius.
Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
Teacher, writer, secretary, and *still* Friend of Cows

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

ONElist: the best place to EXPLORE topics, SHARE ideas, and
CONNECT to people with the same interests.

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

]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	JSA varromurena@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:07:19 -0700 (PDT)


Subject:	forced votes
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 18:09:00 EDT

Salvete omnes,

Was anyone else irritated at having been forced to cast votes for two
unopposed candidates in order to be allowed to also vote on the proposed
law that was on the same ballot?

My personal preference would be to have the option of selecting "no vote"
if there's only one name in the pull-down menu of candidates on a
multi-issue ballot.

This should not be interpreted as a slap at either of the two men
standing for offices. I just don't like being denied to the option of not
voting for some individual candidate.

Valete,

L. Sergius Aust.

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


Subject:	Re: Re: Cincinnatus and the Tribes
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 18:08:58 EDT

Salve Marcus Cassius,

OK, so maybe we can reach some agreement on what happened.

The only new _facts_ you would add are that Lucius Equitius also had
offered to form the tribes & centuries, and that he should be added to
the list of those who failed at this task. That seems irrefutable.

Despite all the rest of the whys and whens and whos you offer, I think
we're in agreement now on the basic facts. We could have a public poll to
determine how many here think that Flavius Vedius would have been
appointed Dictator and would have set up the tribes and centuries had not
Lucius Equitius pushed the issue to the breaking point, BUT I can't
believe that there's a single Roman here who could honestly claim to
think it would have happened that way. So why bother?

So can we not agree on this summary? -- That as a result of a crisis
created in response to Lucius Equitius pushing the issue of the tribes
and centuries, Flavius Vedius was appointed Dictator, wrote a new
Constitution, and formed the tribes and centuries needed to make proper
elections possible in the future.

Is that not a description that we all agree on?

If so, then the only thing left to argue about is how much credit each of
the two men deserves for Nova Roma having reached a solution to its
governmental paralysis. I think that is best left to the individual
judgement of each citizen, and I will not argue it here. The only point I
wanted to make is that without Lucius Equitius' pushing the issue, the
solution wouldn't have happened. That does not detract from the credit
due to Flavius Vedius for his work. I think the only thing that has
detracted from his credit is the way he treated Lucius Equitius when he
was Dictator. And from here on, that is an issue for them to work out (or
not) between them.

And if we can't agree on the above, then I really don't give a rat's
podex about arguing it any more anyway, so let's just move on.

Vale,

L. Sergius Aust.

>From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=137166066112082162090021200165114253071048139" >C--------us622@--------</--------;
>
>Salvete,
>
>I'm afraid that the other, unmentioned facts of the Tribes and Centuries
>problems hardly leave Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus a hero...
>
>1. Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus was informed by the Censors in January of
>this
>year that they could not get to the job within a reasonable amount of time.
>They made a request that the task be brought before the Senate and/or given
>over to a Committee.
>
>2. Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus instead took on the job himself. He did not
>give the situation over to the Senate, nor did he call any sort of Committee
>to work on the Tribes and Centuries.
>
>3. Due to some of the same reasons why the Censors were having a problem,
>Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus was unable to form the Tribes and Centuries
>*either*.
>
>4. Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus then sat on the situation for four whole
>months, doing nothing. He did not do the Tribes and Centuries as he
>promised.
>Nor did he at any time turn the situation over to the Senate or appoint some
>sort of Committee as the Censors had requested. Instead he allowed the
>situation to fester... with the Citizens becoming more enraged by the day.
>
>5. The Censors, after working some months to correct the basic difficulties
>to forming the Tribes and Centuries, (online Citizenship application
>problems, Citizen list problems, etc.) were finally able to do the job. They
>took back the project from Cincinnatus since he had done nothing from
>February till May of this year.
>
>6. While the process of the assigning the Tribes and Centuries was being
>done, Lucius Equetius Cincinnatus began Impeachment proceedings against the
>Censors, for not doing the job.
>
>7. The Social Wars ensued.
>
>8. Flavius Vedius Germanicus took up the Censor position vacated by Marcus
>Cassius Julianus during the Dictatorship. He decided to rework the done by
>the Censors already, and came up with a new set of assignments. Since during
>the Dictatorship no one was able to interfere with the process actually
>*being* completed, the job was finished. Germanicus did a better job at it
>too, since he had a far better grasp of the Tribes and Centuries than either
>myself of Decius Iunius Palladius.
>
>Valete,
>
>Marcus Cassius Julianus

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 18:22:37 -0400

At 10:55 AM 8/28/99 -0400, you wrote:
>From: "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a>
>
>A good place to find all the refs you need (and probably the answer to your
>question) is the relevant entry in Platner's Topographical Dictionary. If
>you go to:
>
><a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>
>2&object=312

Platner's Topographical Dictionary? What exactly is this? It didn't load
properly for me and most of the page was blacked out.

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 18:20:49 -0400

At 02:35 PM 28/08/1999 -0400, you wrote inter alia:
Any living (or formerly
living) thing contains a certain degree of numen/power, presumably, animate
ones more than inanimate. The organs with the most numen/power were
considered by the ancients to be the heart and liver, which is why those
organs were sacrificed to the gods. 99% of the time, the rest of the
animal was cooked and eaten by the celebrants. Sounds like a great excuse
for an old-fashioned pig roast to me. :-)

Respondeo:

There are some big time misconceptions being presented here (and elsewhere
under this rubric):

1. The concept of numen is clearly tied to the concept of animism and as
such, inanimate objects by definition do not have a numen.

2. Organs in and of themselves do not 'contain' numen ... the entire animal
from which it comes does; organs as well were not 'sacrificed to the gods'.
The organs were eaten by the presiding priests (or at least the 'inward
bits' were tasted by the priests). The liver was important because it gave
signs of the gods' will. What was burned on the altar in most sacrifices of
animals would have been the thigh bones wrapped in fat (well attested in
numerous ancient sources), and the gods would survive on the smoke. An
exception would be a holocaust, in which the entire animal would be burned
(and more than one!).

And a word of caution for those of you who have been on rather high horses
about the importance of 'sincere belief' ... what was important to the
religio of the ancient Romans was not 'sincere belief', but the correct
performance of the ritual. Indeed, folks have been tossing around the word
pietas as if it were synonymous with the notion of Christian piety (which
does involve 'sincere belief'), which it is not. Pietas is pretty synoymous
with the concept of officium (duty) in that it comprised officia owing to
one's gods, nation, and family. It's what you were *expected* to do (the
notion of 'sincere belief' was a later Christian addition to the concept of
pietas). In the case of sacrifice (which, as someone else pointed out
derives from sacrum facere 'to make holy') any wandering from the
prescribed methods (including, but not confined to saying 'um' during the
recital of a prayer -- in a forum such as this a spelling mistake would be
the equivalent) or any interruptions (why do you think flamines were
forbidden to eat beans?) would require the ritual to be repeated from the
beginning.

MPJ
]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 18:28:07 -0400

At 03:07 PM 28/08/1999 -0700, you wrote:
This URL is not working. Are you sure its the right
one?

Respondeo:

Yes, it is the right one, here it is again:

<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>
2&object=312

And again (THIS IS IMPORTANT), please note that your mail program (or mine)
will likely cut part of that off and it will spill onto the next line (in
the previous post, e.g., the 2&object=312 part spilled over). In most
browsers, that means you'll have to cut and paste that bit on.

And in response to another post:

Platner is, or rather was, the standard reference work for buildings in
ancient Rome; it has recently been superceded by Richardson's update of the
work. The edition that is online is the 1929 edition.

MPJ
]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: forced votes
From:	"RCW" alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:38:20 -0700

Salve L. Sergius et all....but...we need to have a Consul to serve with our
existing Consul. The people had the opportunity to throw up another
candidate. Shall we compare Decius Iunius Palladius to Gn. Pomepieus
Magnus??? in having a Consul without a Colleague? Please.....I honorably
disagree with your opinion....The State requires 2 Consuls....the State
shall have 2 Consuls. the same with the Plebian Aedile. The People have
the right to have as many candidates as they chose to run. That is the
voice of Republicanism in my humble opinion.

L. Cornelius Sulla
Senator

----- Original Message -----
From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 1999 3:09 PM
Subject: [novaroma] forced votes

> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>
> Salvete omnes,
>
> Was anyone else irritated at having been forced to cast votes for two
> unopposed candidates in order to be allowed to also vote on the proposed
> law that was on the same ballot?
>
> My personal preference would be to have the option of selecting "no vote"
> if there's only one name in the pull-down menu of candidates on a
> multi-issue ballot.
>
> This should not be interpreted as a slap at either of the two men
> standing for offices. I just don't like being denied to the option of not
> voting for some individual candidate.
>
> Valete,
>
> L. Sergius Aust.
>
> certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.
>
> (You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)
>
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
> ONElist: your connection to online communities.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 18:35:22 -0400

An addendum:

At 06:22 PM 28/08/1999 -0400, you wrote:
It didn't load
properly for me and most of the page was blacked out.

Respondeo:

The way it is set up is that it is a big .gif image of the page from the
actual text. If you have your browser set to not load images (or are using
a non-graphical browser), you won't see anything.

MPJ
]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Gens Iulia / religio
From:	Joan Lansberry or Julia Cachia gallae@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:39:37 -0700

At 02:54 PM 8/28/99 , Kyrinia wrote:

>Pythia already runs such a list, and I am on it.
>
>It's at <a href="http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/religio" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/religio</a>

from the hand of Vopisca Iulia Domna Menenia, galla & sacerdos-camellia of
Magna Mater,
gratias tibi ago! I look forward to participation on this list, which I
admit, is far dearer to my heart than the many concerns expressed in this
Forum ... not that I will abandon the latter.

I would like very much to here from members of Gens Iulia with the
intention of augmenting a page which I have begun at
<<a href="http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/nrgiulia.htm" target="_top" >http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/nrgiulia.htm</a>.> Hopefully the
Paterfamilias will contribute some articles of general interest as well.
Some years ago Gaius Iulius Iulianus issued a fine newsletter, _Pax Deorum_
. BTW, we are also eager to add links for our page of Roman Resources
<<a href="http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/nrlinks.htm" target="_top" >http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/nrlinks.htm</a>> , so feel free to suggest
in private e-mail any that I may have neglected. Be assured of my best
wishes and supplication to the Mother of the Gods for the nurturance and
triumphant expansion of this noble Roman Republic reborn! Valete Omnes!
.... * IVLIA *
................................................
Colloquy: <<a href="http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/colloquy.htm" target="_top" >http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/colloquy.htm</a>>
Joan's "Weighty Matters": <<a href="http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/dietlog.htm" target="_top" >http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/dietlog.htm</a>>
Julia: <<a href="http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/julia.htm" target="_top" >http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/julia.htm</a>>
Joan's "Out On a Limb":<<a href="http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/joanalll.html" target="_top" >http://www.casagrande.com/~gallae/joanalll.html</a>>


Subject:	Re: forced votes
From:	JSA varromurena@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:43:46 -0700 (PDT)

--- <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------; wrote:
> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>
> Salvete omnes,
>
> Was anyone else irritated at having been forced to
> cast votes for two
> unopposed candidates in order to be allowed to also
> vote on the proposed
> law that was on the same ballot?
>
> My personal preference would be to have the option
> of selecting "no vote"
> if there's only one name in the pull-down menu of
> candidates on a
> multi-issue ballot.
>

Well, back in Vetus Roma, weren't suffect magistrates
appointed by the Senate? Now, it could be my memory is
faulty, but I can't recall, offhand, any interim
elections to fill suffect posts. I agree with the
above, if only that the whole process in this case
seems redundant (about as useful as voting in a
non-primary election in Chicago).

Lucius Licinius Varro Murena
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	JSA varromurena@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:52:37 -0700 (PDT)

--- "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a> wrote:
> From: "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a>
>
> At 03:07 PM 28/08/1999 -0700, you wrote:
> This URL is not working. Are you sure its the right
> one?
>
> Respondeo:
>
> Yes, it is the right one, here it is again:
>
>
<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>
> 2&object=312
>
> And again (THIS IS IMPORTANT), please note that your
> mail program (or mine)
> will likely cut part of that off and it will spill
> onto the next line (in
> the previous post, e.g., the 2&object=312 part
> spilled over). In most
> browsers, that means you'll have to cut and paste
> that bit on.

Well, I'm running Netscape, and this is what came up
when I clicked on the link you provided:

"ERROR: Page Identifier NOT FOUND

DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7
object=
ident=

Return to DG16.P7 Title Page "

Lucius Licinius Varro Murena
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Mia Soderquist tuozine@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 19:03:16 -0400

"M. Papirius Justus" wrote:
>
> about the importance of 'sincere belief' ... what was important to the
> religio of the ancient Romans was not 'sincere belief', but the correct
> performance of the ritual. Indeed, folks have been tossing around the

Hey, I can even throw in a supporting text! :)
Lifted from Livy on www.concordance.com:

See, too, how great the difference between us and our ancestors. They
left to us certain rites and ceremonies which we can only duly perform
on the Alban Mount or at Lavinium. If it was a matter of religion that
these rites should not be transferred from cities which belonged to an
enemy to us at Rome, shall we transfer them from here to the enemies'
city, Veii, without offending heaven? Call to mind, I pray you, how
often ceremonies are repeated, because through negligence or accident
some detail of the ancestral ritual has been omitted. What remedy was
there for the republic, when crippled by the war with Veii after the
portent of the Alban Lake, except the revival of sacred rites and the
taking of fresh auspices? And more than that, as though after all we
reverenced the ancient faiths, we have transferred foreign deities to
Rome, and have established new ones.

--
***
Mia Soderquist (<a href="/post/novaro--------rotectID=189075253209082116184218072036129208" >tuozine@--------</a>)
ICQ 19818811 or 5926593
<a href="http://home.mindspring.com/~tuozine/critters/Page_1x.html" target="_top" >http://home.mindspring.com/~tuozine/critters/Page_1x.html</a> -TuozzCritters
<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/de/siidmak/" target="_top" >http://www.angelfire.com/de/siidmak/</a> -Conlang Page
<a href="http://home.mindspring.com/~tuozine/Untitled/Page_1x.html" target="_top" >http://home.mindspring.com/~tuozine/Untitled/Page_1x.html</a> -Gens Numeria


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 19:18:22 -0400

This is why I lose my hair more quickly than others:

Please! Varro! Read what I wrote about the line spilling over. Your error
message says precisely that the error I described is happening to you. The
url does not end with DG16.P7 (that's what the error message is telling
you). Here's what you have to do:

1. highlight, then copy the following (i.e. the text that has been spilling
over(:

2&object=312

2. Click on the following:

<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>

3. When your browser launches, it will only have the url in (2) on it (as
it has every time up till now), so reconstruct the whole url by pasting the
stuff from (1) onto the end of it and press enter.

MPJ

At 03:52 PM 28/08/1999 -0700, you wrote:
From: JSA <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=081166091180193192130061163101147165026048139046" >varromurena@--------</a>

--- "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a> wrote:
> From: "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a>
>
> At 03:07 PM 28/08/1999 -0700, you wrote:
> This URL is not working. Are you sure its the right
> one?
>
> Respondeo:
>
> Yes, it is the right one, here it is again:
>
>
<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>
> 2&object=312
>
> And again (THIS IS IMPORTANT), please note that your
> mail program (or mine)
> will likely cut part of that off and it will spill
> onto the next line (in
> the previous post, e.g., the 2&object=312 part
> spilled over). In most
> browsers, that means you'll have to cut and paste
> that bit on.

Well, I'm running Netscape, and this is what came up
when I clicked on the link you provided:

"ERROR: Page Identifier NOT FOUND

DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7
object=
ident=

Return to DG16.P7 Title Page "

Lucius Licinius Varro Murena
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

ONElist members: don't miss out on the latest news at ONElist
Join our community member news update at
<a href=" <a href="http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/newsletter5" target="_top" >http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/newsletter5</a> ">Click Here</a>

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

]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	JSA varromurena@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 16:38:41 -0700 (PDT)

--- "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a> wrote:
> From: "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a>
>
> This is why I lose my hair more quickly than others:
>
> Please! Varro! Read what I wrote about the line
> spilling over. Your error
> message says precisely that the error I described is
> happening to you. The
> url does not end with DG16.P7 (that's what the error
> message is telling
> you). Here's what you have to do:
>
> 1. highlight, then copy the following (i.e. the text
> that has been spilling
> over(:
>
> 2&object=312
>
> 2. Click on the following:
>
>
<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_page.pl?DPI=100&callnum=DG16.P7</a>
>
> 3. When your browser launches, it will only have the
> url in (2) on it (as
> it has every time up till now), so reconstruct the
> whole url by pasting the
> stuff from (1) onto the end of it and press enter.
>
> MPJ
>

Or, you can use this link, which is the correct one,
and one that will take you directly to the Table of
Contents:

<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_title.pl?callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_title.pl?callnum=DG16.P7</a>

Vale.
Lucius Licinius Varro Murena

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	Re: Repost of Ianus question
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:03:26 -0400

Yes, that is the correct one for the Table of Contents; *my* link would
take you directly to the entry on the temple of Janus, which was was the
original question was about.

MPJ

At 04:38 PM 28/08/1999 -0700, you wrote:
Or, you can use this link, which is the correct one,
and one that will take you directly to the Table of
Contents:

<a href="http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_title.pl?callnum=DG16.P7" target="_top" >http://efts.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eos/eos_title.pl?callnum=DG16.P7</a>

]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:30:51 -0400

At 06:20 PM 8/28/99 -0400, you wrote:
>From: "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a>
>1. The concept of numen is clearly tied to the concept of animism and as
>such, inanimate objects by definition do not have a numen.

Don't forget formerly animate objects, as well. I'm still not entirely
sold on the concept of numen, myself, but I have read a bit about it. I'd
love to discuss it with you sometime, as you seem to be more familiar with
the concept than I.

>2. Organs in and of themselves do not 'contain' numen ... the entire animal
>from which it comes does; organs as well were not 'sacrificed to the gods'.
>The organs were eaten by the presiding priests (or at least the 'inward
>bits' were tasted by the priests). The liver was important because it gave
>signs of the gods' will. What was burned on the altar in most sacrifices of
>animals would have been the thigh bones wrapped in fat (well attested in
>numerous ancient sources), and the gods would survive on the smoke. An
>exception would be a holocaust, in which the entire animal would be burned
>(and more than one!).

This is educational -- I had read that organ such as the liver, heart, and
kidneys were the portions often burned for the gods' portion. It wasn't
exactly that they themselves had numen -- perhaps I worded that
incorrectly. As I understood it, they were considered to be the organs
which animated a being -- they were the liveliest portion of a living
being, so to speak -- and therefore were the most numinous portion of the
body.

Oh dear, I'm not expressing myself very well, still. I fear I have much to
learn about numen and I'm not entirely convinced the concept wasn't
actually introduced by classicists, rather than one the ancients perceived.
I would like to dicuss this further, however.

>And a word of caution for those of you who have been on rather high horses
>about the importance of 'sincere belief' ...

(snippage...)

Again, email isn't the best mode of communication. When I have referred to
"belief," it has more to do with believing that rituals and prayers are
effective and that the dieties to whom one prays are real. I suppose the
gods don't much care whether or not you believe in them, but I can't
imagine why anyone would trouble themselves with rituals and such if they
figured they were just going through some old, traditional motions.

When I have referred to "piety," what I meant was a proper form of respect
for the gods. It is a word imbedded with much meaning, and I don't
normally use it in the sense modern folks do -- sometimes I forget that and
need to reclarify. Piety entails a sense of duty; the proper mode of
prayer and sacrifice; as well as proper devotion to the gods. I do think
many of the later Romans involved in State Religion lacked piety in that
they used priesthoods for irreverent reasons which were not connected to
maintaining a healthy relationship with the deities. I wouldn't expect
anyone in NR to treat the Roman gods as moderns treat their god in
monotheistic religions; however, I would expect them to demonstrate their
reverence (and yes, pietas) by regular, properly performed devotionals and
rituals in order to develop relationships with deities who can protect
them, their families, homes, communities, and nation and help them prosper.
That, to me, is the whole purpose of religion.

Sorry, I don't have any "high horses" around here, just a couple of cats.
:-) I never meant to sound snooty about it and I apologize if I came off
that way.

Valete!

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Topographical Dictionary (was Re: Repost of Ianus question)
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:54:17 -0400

I'm afraid I'm still having trouble with this particular page (p. 278). I
can see the entirety of pages 277 and 279, but only the first three lines
of page 278 -- the rest seems to be blacked out. If anyone else can read
it, could you please copy it to me?

Gratias tibi ago!
Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
Teacher, writer, secretary, and *still* Friend of Cows


Subject:	A Bit of Latin Humor . .
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:57:07 -0400

A friend forwarded this to me -- forgive me if you've seen it before, but I
thought it was cute.

>Here's some Latin phrases you may find useful in your
>everyday life.
>
>Sona si Latine loqueris.
>Honk if you speak Latin.
>
>Nupperime de Gallia huc volavi! Mehercule, bracchia mea
>defatiga sunt!
>I just flew in from Gaul, and boy, are my arms tired!
>
>Eheu, ardeo.
>Alas, I am burning.
>
>Ut si!
>As if!
>
>Amicule, deliciae, num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
>Baby, sweetheart, would I lie to you?
>
>Magnus frater spectat te
>Big Brother is watching you
>
>Mellita, domi adsum.
>Honey, I'm home.
>
>Si hoc signum legere potes, operis boni in rebus Latinus
>alacribus et fructuosis potiri potes!
>If you can read this sign, you can get a good job in the
>fast-paced, high-paying world of Latin!
>
>Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo.
>I'll have a pizza with everything on it.
>
>Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?
>Is that a scroll in your toga, or are you just happy to see
>me?
>
>Solum potestis prohibere ignes silvarum.
>Only you can prevent forest fires.
>
>Nunc prehende uxore meam. . .sis!
>Take my wife. . .please!
>
>Illud iterum dicere potes!
>You can say that again!

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: Topographical Dictionary (was Re: Repost of Ianus question)
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 21:03:03 -0400

I suspect you're loading a cached copy that was interrupted; press the
reload button after going to the url ...

mpj

At 08:54 PM 28/08/1999 -0400, you wrote:
From: Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>

I'm afraid I'm still having trouble with this particular page (p. 278). I
can see the entirety of pages 277 and 279, but only the first three lines
of page 278 -- the rest seems to be blacked out. If anyone else can read
it, could you please copy it to me?

Gratias tibi ago!
Jenn--------nt <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
Teacher, writer, secretary, and *still* Friend of Cows

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

Show your ONElist SPIRIT!
<a href=" <a href="http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/tshirt2" target="_top" >http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/tshirt2</a> ">Click Here</a>
With a new ONElist SHIRT available through our website.

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

]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: Re: division.
From:	Steven Robinson amgunn@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 20:05:10 -0700

Avete Omnes,

Venator scripsit,

>
> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------;
>
> (magnum excision)
>
> Do not expect this work to be completed in a year or even two.
>
> (minimum excision)
>
> Valete!
> Q. Fabius Maximus
> Curule Aedile.
>

If I may, this part of the post (plus the surrounding commentary) by Quintus
Fabius Maximus speaks to a point I have been making for some time in mine
own Faith
Community, and a few times herein.

There has been for some little while a re-awakening occuring, a return to
the Holy Ones of our pre-Christian ancestors. The European,
non-Mediterranean re-construction community is quite large. They have gone
through many of the struggles we seem to be having here. (And yes, I do
term myself a Roman to them, or rather Duo-Spiritus, both Roman and
Asatruar.)

As a side note: friendship with honorable, devout Christians such as Lucius
Marius Fimbria, Marcus Minucius Audens and Nicolaus Moravius Vado are
becoming less uncommon.

We of the North know that we are a first generation, the ones who are doing
the exploring, the surveying, the site preparation, perhaps even getting as
far as digging the trenches and installing footings. I would suggest to
you, Citizens of Nova Roma, that you are of a first generation also.

I look forward to the day that Nova Roma, like Asatru groups to which I
belong, is able to have a physical center, a new Capatoline Forum.

I shall help as best I can. But, if this New Rome is allowed to implode,
I'll miss it and just have one fewer stop in my travels to different Heathen
and Pagan communities.

So, my plea: Let the past go. Ante-Nova Roma is gone. We must needs get
to the business of shaping and strengthening Nova Roma.

mea sententia

In Amicus - Venator


Subject:	Re: Topographical Dictionary (was Re: Repost of Ianus question)
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 21:22:30 -0400

At 09:03 PM 8/28/99 -0400, you wrote:
>From: "M. Pap--------s Justus" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197166104009127132130232203026129208071" >pap--------s@--------</a>
>
>I suspect you're loading a cached copy that was interrupted; press the
>reload button after going to the url ...

Thank you; that worked for me. Unfortunately, I don't see where this might
help answer my question about Ianus's possible association with water,
except that it repeats the story I already mentioned.

Any other ideas?

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: Topographical Dictionary (was Re: Repost of Ianus question)
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" papirius@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:00:57 -0400

At 09:22 PM 28/08/1999 -0400, you wrote:
Thank you; that worked for me. Unfortunately, I don't see where this might
help answer my question about Ianus's possible association with water,
except that it repeats the story I already mentioned.

Respondeo:

Well if you read your version of the story and the one in the TD, the big
difference is that Janus *caused* the hot water to gush from the shrine
(with a reference to Macrobius if you want to track it down). That's one
supposed origin of the shrine. Another is that Romulus and Titus Tatius
built the shrine as a symbol of the union of their two communities (in
which case a god which looked 'two directions', i.e. to the Roman
settlement and the Sabine settlement, would probably make sense) ... this
one is noted in Servius' commentary on the Aeneid. The most common one
though (to judge by its citation in numerous authors) is that it was
established by Numa in order to 'teach' his people to be civilized (a
visual representation of when Rome was at war or peace ... that's in Livy
1.19). Now why the temple of Janus? Because as you read in Livy 1.32 or
thereabouts (sorry, all I have is a translation at hand), you will find
that Janus was the god who was invoked when the fetiales declared a 'just'
war. But I digress ... if you read the piece in the TD, and your own refs,
you will see that the common thread is the notion of boundaries ... Janus
is a god of boundaries and when one was going to 'violate' a boundary, one
had to propitiate the divinity who presided over such.

In other words, the association of Janus with water can be made on two
grounds:

1. That he was the source of the gush of hot water that saved Rome from a
Sabine attack

or

2. That water might be seen as a boundary (although rivers, of course, had
their own numina)

mpj
]|[ M. Papirius Justus ]|[ <a href="http://web.idirect.com/~atrium" target="_top" >http://web.idirect.com/~atrium</a> ]|[


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	Daniel Dreesbach dreesbach@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 19:18:06 -0700 (PDT)

Tried that section was missing.
Gaius Iunius Germanus

--- Gaius Marius Merullus <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a> wrote:
> From: "Gaius Marius Merullus" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a>
>
> Take a look at the album civium in the aerarium
> Saturni
>
>
>
> :From: Daniel Dreesbach <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114212192056099202169102046248100208071048" >dreesbach@--------</a>
> :
> :How do we know which tribe we are with
> :
>
>
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor
> ----------------------------
>
> ONElist announces "FRIENDS & FAMILY!"
> For details, including our weekly drawing, go to
> <a href="http://www.onelist.com/info/onereachsplash3.html" target="_top" >http://www.onelist.com/info/onereachsplash3.html</a>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at <a href="http://auctions.yahoo.com" target="_top" >http://auctions.yahoo.com</a>


Subject:	ME - WE & TEAM
From:	"LegionXXIV" LegionXXIV@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:46:56 -0400

VICESIMA - QUARTA
LEGION XXIV - MEDIA - ATLANTIA

* PROVINCIA PENNSYLVANIA *
* MEDIA - ATLANTICA * AMERICIA *

Defending the Frontiers of Ancient Rome
in the Mid - Atlantic Province
of North America

August 28, 1999
Year of Rome 2752

Avete et Salutatio... Fellow Romani

Hello and Greetings from Gallio Velius Marsallas,
Praefectus, Legio XXIV-Media-Atlantia;
Tribune Militaris - NovaRoma - Gens Velia
aka George W. Metz
13 Post Run Newtown Square, PA 19073-3014
<a h--------"/post/nova--------?p--------ctID=034056178009193116001195151189114012071048139" >legionXXIV@--------</a> 610-353-4982
<a href="http://www.legionXXIV.org" target="_top" >http://www.legionXXIV.org</a>

Some food for thought concerning the recent and past
postings on the "List" and the "Needs" of NovaRoma.

Minds are like parachutes...
They only function when open.

All of us on the "List" and in NovaRoma
could profit from...

A lot less about "ME"...
and much more concerning "WE".

No matter what accomplishments you achieve...
Somebody helps you.

TEAM = Together Everyone Acheives More

Notice that there is no "I" in the word "TEAM"!

I remain as always,

Tuus in Sodalicio Respublica Romanae
Yours in the Comradeship of the Roman Republic

Gallio / George


Subject:	Re: Topographical Dictionary (was Re: Repost of Ianus question)
From:	Jenni Hunt moonloon@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:50:25 -0400

M. Papirius Justus:

Thank you for your analysis. I hadn't thought of water as a boundary, but
it makes perfect sense. If you should ever run across any other references
to Ianus and water, I'd be pleased to hear of them. Actually, I'd be
pleased to hear more from you in general -- the list needs more discussions
on such topics.

I. Ov-------- Luna <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029233253185018190112158203026129208071" >moonloon@--------</a>
(Jenni Hunt)


Subject:	Re: Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	"Gaius Marius Merullus" rmerullo@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 23:10:54 -0400

Salvete Q Fabi et alii

:From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=246157057089235135169082190036" >SFP55@--------</--------;
:
:The problem we have here in the modern world, is sacrifice. The word means
:"to give up."

That's is what "sacrifice" means. But sacrum or divinum facere seems to me
to mean to make something holy or divine, that is, pass it to the gods. So
one can burn incense, and give the pleasing scent to a god. It doesn't have
to mean that you're "depriving" yourself of the incense, not at all. You
can stay in the room and enjoy the scent too.

In the case of a blood sacrifice, which is not an accepted part of Religio
Romana as endorsed by Nova Roma, I believe that one would pour blood from
the animal into a flame to offer it to the god. The meat would then be
consumed at a feast in honor of the god.

If I'm really thirsty, I have a coke in my hand, and I pour it
:on the ground, I sacrifice personally. I'm giving something up, something
:that would have eased my discomfort. If you slaughter a pig, but are well
:fed when you do it, or so rich that its loss doesn't bother you in the
least,
:what are you scarificing?

And if you can run to the next 7-11 to buy a coke, you are sacrificing what
exactly? There is nothing wrong with your libation offering, but please do
not believe for one second that your argument against blood sacrifice holds
any water; it does not.

Valete

Gaius Marius Merullus


Subject:	Re: forced votes
From:	"Gaius Marius Merullus" rmerullo@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 23:19:20 -0400

Salvete Luci Sergi et alii

I agree with you. One should be able to vote on each item on an assembly's
agenda separately; that is, one should be able to leave item(s) on the
cista blank, if one cannot arrive at a confident vote either way on a law,
or support any of the candidates for office. The forced vote format should
definitely be corrected for future voting.

Of course I hope that people are able to vote for candidates running for
office, and vote yes/no on all laws. But choice should be preserved to the
maximum extent possible.

Valete

Gaius Marius Merullus

:From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
:
:Salvete omnes,
:
:Was anyone else irritated at having been forced to cast votes for two
:unopposed candidates in order to be allowed to also vote on the proposed
:law that was on the same ballot?
:
:My personal preference would be to have the option of selecting "no vote"
:if there's only one name in the pull-down menu of candidates on a
:multi-issue ballot.
:
:This should not be interpreted as a slap at either of the two men
:standing for offices. I just don't like being denied to the option of not
:voting for some individual candidate.
:
:Valete,
:
:L. Sergius Aust.
:


Subject:	Tribes was Re: Collegium Pontificum
From:	"Gaius Marius Merullus" rmerullo@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 23:33:06 -0400

Salvete Caie Iuni et alii

I just checked it. The tribal assignments are there as numbers, rather than
names.

Valete

Gaius Marius Merullus
rogator

:From: Daniel Dreesbach <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=114212192056099202169102046248100208071048" >dreesbach@--------</a>
:
:Tried that section was missing.
:Gaius Iunius Germanus
:


Subject:	Re: forced votes
From:	"RCW" alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 21:22:19 -0700

Well again...my question would be, as a citizen of Nova Roma, why would you
be more concerned with a law..than with electing duly elected officials for
Nova Roma, remember it is these officials who will draft more laws that you
will need to vote on? I would think that all votes would have been just as
vital, and to not vote on an issue....regardless if it is a lex or a
magistrate would be well, for lack of a better word, irresponsible? But
that is just my opinion as someone who has a Degree in Political Science.

L. Cornelius Sulla
Senator
----- Original Message -----
From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 1999 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] forced votes

> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>
> Salve Lucius Cornelius,
>
> No, I'm sorry, but you missed my point entirely. I am not objecting to
> the election of a second Consul, nor am I objecting to the candidate
> standing for it. My objection is to not having the option to vote at all
> unless I voted for both unopposed candidates.
>
> In all elections, I make it a practice not to cast a vote for a candidate
> who is unopposed, unless I want to simply cast a vote of approval.
>
> In this particular election, to have followed that principle, I would
> have to have been allowed to vote on the law that was proposed without
> voting for either of the two unopposed political candidates.
>
> Instead, if I was to be allowed to vote either for or against the
> proposed law, I was forced to also register a vote for both candidates on
> the ballot. In essence, it was "either vote for both of these men or you
> cannot vote on the proposed law."
>
> Thus I was forced to register a vote for both of you, whether I wanted to
> or not, in order to be allowed to cast a vote for or against the law.
>
> It is that forced vote to which I object. There should have been an
> option to not check off the candidates' names unless one actually wanted
> to vote for them. I'm sure it was only a programming oversight and not a
> sinister plot to force citizens to vote for you.
>
> Vale,
>
> L. Sergius Aust.
>
> >From: "RCW" <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a>
> >
> >Salve L. Sergius et all....but...we need to have a Consul to serve with
our
> >existing Consul. The people had the opportunity to throw up another
> >candidate. Shall we compare Decius Iunius Palladius to Gn. Pomepieus
> >Magnus??? in having a Consul without a Colleague? Please.....I honorably
> >disagree with your opinion....The State requires 2 Consuls....the State
> >shall have 2 Consuls. the same with the Plebian Aedile. The People have
> >the right to have as many candidates as they chose to run. That is the
> >voice of Republicanism in my humble opinion.
> >
> >L. Cornelius Sulla
> >Senator
>
>
> certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.
>
> (You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)
>
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
> Why do WOMEN ASTRONAUTS have such BAD HAIRCUTS?
> What happens if you CLEAN your self-cleaning OVEN?
> The DR. has answers:<a href=" <a href="http://www.drscience.com/u" target="_top" >http://www.drscience.com/u</a> ">Click</a>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


Subject:	Re: forced votes
From:	dean6886@--------)
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 23:29:29 -0500 (CDT)

Someone here may wish to vote on a law and yet have let's say a
personal dispute or strong dislike for a candidate in the future. Some
people might consider it a slap in the face to have to have their vote
counted as support for that particular candidate. It's purely a
physcological thing I guess. I don't personally think that someone that
feels that way is being derelict with a no vote, just having their
protest noted by abstentia.

Gaius Drusus Domitianus


Subject:	Citizenship applications
From:	dean6886@--------)
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 23:47:54 -0500 (CDT)

As we are currently not accepting citizenship applications until the
elections are over ( I assume as not to complicate the voting) I wonder
if there might not be a better way.

Anything wrong with taking the application(s) and just stating that
after reviewing applications, any acceptances of citizenship will be
after such and such date? I hope we don't need a law to do that as a
form of common practice in the future---- do we? If on the other hand it
has more to do with time considerations for the censors, for this or any
impending work how about hiring on at least one or two scribes to help
out? Just trying to be helpful.

Gaius Drusus Domitianus


Subject:	Re: [Re: forced votes]
From:	"RCW" alexious@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:51:08 -0700

Now see....Vercingetorix....just how would you know that?? LOL! Now its
comments like that that will force use to martial the Legions against the
Gauls...LOL! Oh what a comedian we have here....LOL!

L. Cornelius Sulla

> >
> > Salve L. Sergius et all....but...we need to have a Consul to serve with
our
> > existing Consul.
>
> Consuls are much better served with roasted potatoes, some fava beans, and
a
> nice Chianti.
>
>
> Vercingetorix Lecter
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
<a href="http://webmail.netscape.com" target="_top" >http://webmail.netscape.com</a>.
>
> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
>
> Show your ONElist SPIRIT!
> <a href=" <a href="http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/tshirt2" target="_top" >http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/tshirt2</a> ">Click Here</a>
> With a new ONElist SHIRT available through our website.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


Subject:	Re: Re: Cincinnatus and the Tribes
From:	"Helena Equitia" gretagoring@--------
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:56:05 PDT

>From: "Flavius Vedius Germa--------s" <a href="/post/--------roma?protectID=123056091213158116036102228219114090071048139" >germa--------s@--------</a> >
>Salve,
>
> > From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=226107192180229130130232031248147208071048" >LSergAust@--------</--------;
>
>I cannot let your blatant attempt to save face for Cincinnatus go
>unanswered. Cincinnatus was trying to usurp the very Constitution (as it
>then stood) by his actions. To assign any credit for our >progress to him
>is the same as assigning credit to Adolf Hitler for the creation of Israel.
>It's tortured, it's surreal, and it's >contrary to common sense.

I think it is your analogy that is contrary to common sense, etc.
Cincinnatus=Hitler??? Excuse me, but I am rolling my eyes...

-Helena Equitia