| Subject: |
Re: Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
Decius Iunius Palladius amcgrath@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 00:45:21 -0500 (EST) |
|
On 8 Dec 1999 &-------- href="/post/novaroma?protectID=034233091161146153033082190" >--------@--------&--------a> wrote:
> From: &-------- href="/post/novaroma?protectID=034233091161146153033082190" >--------@--------&--------a>
>
> Salvete Omnes Novae Romae Cives.
Salve Luci Anne Laurenti,
> I'm Lvcivs Annevs Lavrentivs from the Mother Italica Provincia.
>
> Probably this masochist law will pass,
Masocist???? What do you mean by that here?
> cos it has by its side all the most
> importants offices of NR (first the Consuls), whereas to avverse it are
> only a little and insignificant group of "cives privati";
There have been other citizens in favor of this law, not just the senior
magistrates. Ordinary citizens, some who will be made ineligible for
some positions by the law have spoken up in favor of it because they
realize that this is right for Nova Roma.
> anyway I want
> to "fight" til the end to prove to citizens that minimum age law has
only
> disvantage and none vantage for the Republic, and that it has no sense
> in OUR case.
> > I'm happy to see that my emails about the question got several answers
> by the "pro-lege" as by the "contra-legem", even if it seems to me some
> of these participations didn't really reply to my assertions.
When reading your emails I was hoping for you to reply to our concerns.
You have not, especially when we state that we wish to bring the entire
cursus honorum in being, and make us more like ancient Rome.
> Then I want to answer to Consul Deicus Iunius Palladius, which I think
> didn't still understand the difference between a VIRTUAL state and a
> REAL state, when he says:
I know the difference. However, you fail to make a case that we should act
any differently than a macronation. You confuse micronation and virtual
nation. We may be small, but make no mistake, we are a nation and we
should act like one. To not have these requirements because it may be
inconvienient for some citizens is not a good reason, it is an awful one.
Rather, we have made the case I believe that Nova Roma can only benefit by
this law and I think it will.
> > Most nations have age requirements for political positions, including
> > the United States and quite probably Italy has as them as well. It
> > shows that such positions are taken seriously by the nation and that
> > some life experience is necessary for some leadership positions.
>
> This speech is definitely right Consul, but I remind that we are NOT USA
> or Italy or another world State: we're a Micronation, we aren't a
> territorial enthity, we don't have taxes (this is a luck!), we don't
have
> an army,
No, we are not the USA or Italy but we are Nova Roma. If we are to be
taken seriously as a nation, we should start acting like one. We don't
have taxes yet, but I imagine we will sometime within a year; we do not
yet have territory but we will, probably within 10 years, and actually we
do have an army, even if it is reenacting legions.
> and we could never be invaded by some nations: this because we
> are a Micronation! And maybe we should even look at what other
> Micronations do: I visited the most important Micronations today
> (Reunion, Corvinia, Molossia and Ozarkia), and I didn't see any hints to
> age limits to access to public offices.
Frankly, I don't care what other "micronations" do. We dwarf most of them
in size and we have *real world goals*--they do not. That is why we do not
generally associate with them or have "diplomatic relations" with them.
(look at the website to see our policy about having relations with
micronations) Because we are a REAL WORLD micronation, with real world
goals, albeit modest ones. We are not play acting in Nova Roma, like
Reunion (esp) or the others. We are serious and we should take ourselves
seriously. What they do or do not do is of little concern to us.
> I can't be definitely sure of
> this affirmation, that's why I sent an email to all these Governments to
> have an answer about it.
> But for what I've seen, age limit would be an EXCLUSIVE of Nova Roma, and
> this should give us to reflect a bit.
Yes, it tells me that we are doing something right, that we are sober
minded and dedicated. We are Nova Romans.
> Finally I take what Consul Lucius Cornelius Sulla said at the end of his
> affirmation:
Not to detract anything from my co-consul, but you are quoting me, though
you may have confused that because when he sent his message, he took that
quote from my previous message to add to what I said. Please give credit
where it is due. :)
> > One cannot start at the top, you must earn your way up there. By
> > serving in a lesser position, you gain experience, prove yourself to
> > Nova Romans and SERVE Nova Roma, enabling Her to prosper. It
> > isn't about what is fulfilling for us at the moment, it is about
> > advancing the cause of Nova Roma. That my friend is where you miss
> > the point.
>
> I COMPLETELY agree with these words, Consul! But it seems to me it's my
> proposal for Cursus Honorum (without age limits), because you don't talk
> about age here, but only about "experience" gained "by serving in a
> lesser position";
That's because I wasn't responding to a comment about age but to a citizen
who said that the only positions worth holding in Nova Roma were consul
and praetor, because he thought they were the only ones that advance Nova
Roma. My response was that one cannot start at the top but must earn his
way up from the bottom and that besides, some positions, like webmaster or
moderator or editor, advance Nova Roma more than praetor because they
do actual, real and vital work necssary to the day to day survival of nova
Roma. This is not to say that praetor will not grow in importance but it
does say that some positions are important not because of their title but
because of what they do.
> or
> would you tell me that the famous unknown man 27 year old, who joyned NR
> since 1 month e who candidate for Consul, EARNED this office more than
> me, citizen since 9 years? If that's it I don't see anything of the
> Freedom and the Democracy professed by our Republic, Consul.
> Maybe unconsciously you know that mine would be the best way to realize
> the Cursus, whereas the proposed law is only a move to keep power
> amongst the same people, leaving off the new Nova Roma generation...
You don't get it. I *agree* with you that the cursus honorum should be
taken seriously, and that ideally one should go from one position up to
the next. This is as it was in ancient Rome and it is as it should be (and
will be, probably by the next consuls) in Nova Roma. Age limits were and
are (will be if the law passes) a part of the cursus honorum, however,
and should be viewed as integral to the system.
Vale,
Decius Iunius Palladius,
Consul
>
> Valete Omnes, et semper Vobiscvm sit Romana Virtvs.
> Lvcivs Annevs LAVRENTIVS, candidate for Praetor.
>
> >
|
| Subject: |
Pro Cornelia lege |
| From: |
"RMerullo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 10:15:32 -0500 |
|
Ave popule novoromane
I encourage anyone who has not voted yet to vote for Lex Cornelia de
Privatis Rebus. Be sure to read the law on the ballot, it has been revised
since it was first posted to the list, and, I think, since it was quoted on
Caesar's election page.
The law provides an excellent set of guidelines, in my view, to protect
citizens' confidential information without hindering NR magistrates in any
important business in service of the Res Publica.
Ago gratias magnas Consuli Lucio Cornelio Sullae
Valete
C Marius Merullus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Fwd: appreciation |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 10:18:59 -0500 |
|
Salve Luci Licini
I didn't see the connection to Nova Roma in all of this. Did I miss
something?
Vale
C Marius Merullus
>From: JSA <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=081166091180193192130061163101147165026048139046" >varromurena@--------</a>
>
>>From a post I recently received.
>
>
>
>
> "Our church uses Gregorian Chant,
|
| Subject: |
Re: Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
"RMerullo" rmerullo@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 10:30:01 -0500 |
|
Salvete Luci Annee et alii
If you completely agree with following the cursus honorum, why did you run
for praetor this year, and not quaestor or a vigintisexviri position?
You may have a very good reason; let's hear it.
You took much of the wind out of your own sails with the assertion that the
age law was a mechanism to keep power in the hands of the same people.
There must be a couple billion people in this world, at least, who meet the
age requirements specified in the law.
The only mechanism in place now to keep "power" in the hands of a few is
lack of participation. When lower offices go unfilled, noone is trained to
serve in the high offices, and the same few people will be expected to
continue to run NR on their own. But, as you point out, NR has no territory
(nor much in the way of assets, other than human resources of voluntarily
associated individuals), and, "power" here is not going to sustain NR's
growth. Only expansion and realization of some common ideas will do it.
Valete
C Marius Merullus
>From: &-------- href="/post/novaroma?protectID=034233091161146153033082190" >--------@--------&--------a>
>
>Finally I take what Consul Lucius Cornelius Sulla said at the end of his
affirmation:
>
>> One cannot start at the top, you must earn your way up there. By
>> serving in a lesser position, you gain experience, prove yourself to
>> Nova Romans and SERVE Nova Roma, enabling Her to prosper. It
>> isn't about what is fulfilling for us at the moment, it is about
>> advancing the cause of Nova Roma. That my friend is where you miss
>> the point.
>
>I COMPLETELY agree with these words, Consul! But it seems to me it's my
proposal for Cursus Honorum (without age limits), because you don't talk
about age here, but only about "experience" gained "by serving in a lesser
position"; you even say "you must earn your way up there", and this can be
made with Cursus Honorum by offices, not surely by age: or would you tell me
that the famous unknown man 27 year old, who joyned NR since 1 month e who
candidate for Consul, EARNED this office more than me, citizen since 9
years? If that's it I don't see anything of the Freedom and the Democracy
professed by our Republic, Consul.
>Maybe unconsciously you know that mine would be the best way to realize the
Cursus, whereas the proposed law is only a move to keep power amongst the
same people, leaving off the new Nova Roma generation...
>
>Valete Omnes, et semper Vobiscvm sit Romana Virtvs.
>Lvcivs Annevs LAVRENTIVS, candidate for Praetor.
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
Exitil@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 12:54:24 EST |
|
In a message dated 12/7/99 11:45:46 PM Central Standard Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232219108127031050199203252129208071" >amcgrath@--------</a> writes:
>
> Frankly, I don't care what other "micronations" do. We dwarf most of them
> in size and we have *real world goals*--they do not.
Real world goals which could have been accomplished long ago with decent
leadership. Not to mention you plan on being a church more than an actual
nation. No, I dont want to get the argument started again, I'm just pointing
it out that Nova Roma is not now, or planning to be, something I would call a
nation.
|
| Subject: |
Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratuum Aetate |
| From: |
"Nicolaus Moravius" n_moravius@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 08 Dec 1999 10:56:56 PST |
|
Quiritibus, salutem!
Tiberius Claudius Lucentius Vindex (who it is nice to see airing his
well-considered views on this list) wrote, inter alia:
>However, I think Lucius Anneus Laurentius has made a good point that the
>lex, whilst providing the benefits listed above, does unfairly discriminate
>against citizens on the grounds of their biological age. By this, I mean
>his
>point that a 26 year old citizen of several year's standing must be
>exceptional to be allowed to stand for consul, whereas a completely fresh
>27
>year old citizen doesn't have to be even average to stand.
Respondet Vado: A 27 year old newcomer would have to be pretty exceptional
to be voted in as Consul, wouldn't he? It doesn't seem very likely to me.
What does seem likely to me though, is that such citizens could pick up
large numbers of extra voting points simply for putting themselves forward
as no-hopers. This is clearly unfair, and open to abuse by the
cynical-minded.
Vindex: >The ancient cursus honorum was, quite logically, based on
biological age.
>Roma Antiqua's citizens were (mostly) born citizens, and so biological age
>was (usually) equal to length of citizenship (and thus to experience of the
>world in general and Rome in particular). In our case, there is no such
>firm
>link between biological age and experience of the res publica.
>
>May I suggest that state discrimination against the inexperienced (which is
>what the lex amounts to) should be based on length of citizenship rather
>than length of life?
Vado: I think this is an excellent point, though the two longevities in Nova
Roma will go together more often in time.
Vindex:>May I go one further, and suggest that a Lex using Century Points as
a means
>of allowing candidacy for office could:
>
>a)be a fair method of excluding against the insufficiently experienced
>and
>b)be a move towards a cursus honorum based on succession of offices
>
>because century points are gained by length of citizenship and offices
>held.
Vado: century points can also be gained by becoming an official priest or
augur and then doing practically nothing with that office, or by standing
for a magistrate's office without a snowball in Hades' chance of being
elected (and thus running little risk of having to do any work). As I have
said elsewhere and on other Leges, no Lex can ever be proof against abuse by
bad faith, but if a potential problem is forseen, we would surely do well to
address it.
Although I have already voted for the Lex as the best option of restoring
the Cursus Honorum currently available, being so persuaded by the arguments
of Palladius, Audens, Caesar and others, I would vote (and work) for an
amendment to the Lex which would take account of my amendment to Vindex'
amendment. In the meantime, I would urge those who have not yet voted, to do
so in favour of the Lex Iunia de Magistratuum Aetate.
Valete bene,
Vado.
|
| Subject: |
ATTN PLEBEIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: Comitia Plebis Tributa |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" amg@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 19:28:07 -0000 |
|
Salvete cives
I hereby make the new version of the Lex Crylla de securandis magistratus
plebis part of the ballot for the Comitia Plebis Tributa. In case it is
approved, this new version shall be adopted instead of the former lex.
Moreover I extend this Comitia Plebis until:
-Wednsday, 15 December, 1700 EST (2300 Roman Time, 1400 Pacific Time).
I'm specially grateful for the feedback provided by Gnaeus Tarquinius
Caesar, candidate for Tribunus Plebis.
The new version reads as follows:
-------------------------------------------------------
Lex Crylla de securandis magistratus plebis
If no candidates for Tribunus Plebis or Aedilis Plebis declare in December,
within 3 months from the end of the elections, the Senate must provide for
at least one magistrate to occupy each of those magistracies, by appointment
of plebeian citizens. Aspirants to an office should be examined in the
following order of preference:
1 - Candidates to other offices, who have lost in the previous elections;
2 - Magistrates currently serving that office;
3 - Any other citizens;
If after this examination there are still vacancies, the Senate shall
appoint Senators to fill the required magistracies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Tribunus Plebis
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratuum Aetate |
| From: |
SFP55@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:48:57 EST |
|
Salvete
Gentlemen, this law is needed at this time, because Nova Roma is about to
turn three years old. At first, like any new organization the interest in
that organization centered by those people who have a "stake" in it. The top
magistrates were depended on doing the right thing for Roma, using
experiences gained in their life.
All were mid 30s or older, and some were ex-military.
But now that Roma continues to attempt to carry out her mission, a new
infusion of blood is needed to avoid incestious stagnation. This law was
impossible before because frankly Roma sprang up from nowhere. There was no
progression needed and none established. There was only suggestions.
Now I'm glad to say that youth are interested in the micronation. Therefore
"training" for Nova Roma offices becomes a must, and and a law establishing
the order in which these training must proceed, needed.
Citizen Lucius Anneus Laurentius raises the point that the lex, by
carrying out its purpose will unfairly discriminate against citizens on the
grounds of their biological age. He then raises an inane example of the fact
that he, a grifted 19 year old cannot be a consul while a newly recruited 27
year old citizen of average ability may stand. Lucius Anneus misses the
point. That 27 year old would not have the networking ability, nor the
political "clout" to become elected as consul. And those safeguards are
already installed in the voting process.
In closing I urge all citizens to vote for this lex. It will benefit Nova
Roma citizens in the future, and it accomplishes Nova Roma's sacred mission,
further reviving an institution of the old republic.
Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus
|
| Subject: |
ATTN: Campaign of Antonius Gryllus Graecus: Race for praetor (interview by G. M. Merrullo) |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" amg@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 19:59:21 -0000 |
|
Salve Merulle et omnes
As you know, the primary concern of a Praetor is the administration of the
Law. Nevertheless Nova Roma is just begining and at the moment we can say
that the substantial, consistent and competent work that we have seen has
still not managed to provide a Civil Law. Until now we have done well with
the Constitution. But the truth is also that we have seen none but a few
situations that demanded civil law, and I'm not affraid to say that many of
the decisions taken during those situations were somewhat based on
intuition, sometimes dubious, and while I'm not going to discuss the quality
results, they seem not to have been undertaken in the fairest and most
constitutional way.
The office of Praetor has been until now somewhat neglected in what concerns
the definition of our Civil Law. We can see it by the reduced number of laws
enacted by the Praetors. I know this must still be a consequence of the
somewhat recent Civil Wars, which turned the enforcement of the Constitution
into the sole function of the magistracy. But now that we have a good
Constitution, we must start working.
The primary concern of the Praetors will not be to judge citizens. In fact
civil disputes seldom arise, and the majority of these fall within the set
of cases to be judged by the Comitia Plebis Tributa.
I think that the priority of a Praetor is in fact the enforcement of the
Constitution and Law - in fact the Law has meaning only if enforced.
Closely Following is the edification of the Civil Law of Nova Roma. In my
view, this must be based on the Ancient Roman Civil Law, but adapted to our
time. Of course what I mean by adaptation includes human rights and equal
rights between man and woman, the right to the difference either of race,
sexuality, etc..
Valete omnes
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Candidate for Praetor
|
| Subject: |
ATTN: Campaign of Antonius Gryllus Graecus for Praetor |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" amg@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:12:02 -0000 |
|
Salve civis
Antonius Gryllus Graecus followed the Cursus Honorum:
- Propraetor Lusitaniae
- Aedilis Plebis
- Tribunus Plebis
The others have followed their own nose!
Vote for Antonius Gryllus Graecus, the friend of the people!
"Don't let the inexperienced guide you, for he can only lead you to a bad
experience!" - Antonius Gryllus Graecus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratuum Aetate |
| From: |
StarWreck@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 15:21:28 EST |
|
Salve, Vado
<< >May I suggest that state discrimination against the inexperienced (which
is
>what the lex amounts to) should be based on length of citizenship rather
>than length of life?
Vado: I think this is an excellent point, though the two longevities in Nova
Roma will go together more often in time. >>
I also agree, length of citizenship would be a more acurate potrayal for the
Nova Roma government. As for experience, perhaps a requirement stating that
one must hold office in a lower position for a set amount of time before
climbing to the position above it. Such as one must be a Senator for a set
time before they can become a Consul.
Vale,
Iulius Thompsonus
Post Scriptum: I would appreciate input about my new website that I have
begun work on <A
HREF="<a href="http://members.xoom.com/RomaImperia/RomaImperia/index.html">Roman" target="_top" >http://members.xoom.com/RomaImperia/RomaImperia/index.html">Roman</a>
History</A>
|
| Subject: |
Re: ATTN PLEBEIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: Comitia Plebis Tributa |
| From: |
George VanDeWater VanDeWGe@-------- |
| Date: |
Wed, 08 Dec 1999 13:27:21 -0700 |
|
Salve Antonio,
I am confused. Do we not already have candidates for these positions.? Hasn't the voting alredy begun? Do those who have voted, go back and vote on this new version of Lex Crylla?
Valete
>>> "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> 12/08 12:28 PM >>>
From: "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Salvete cives
I hereby make the new version of the Lex Crylla de securandis magistratus
plebis part of the ballot for the Comitia Plebis Tributa. In case it is
approved, this new version shall be adopted instead of the former lex.
Moreover I extend this Comitia Plebis until:
-Wednsday, 15 December, 1700 EST (2300 Roman Time, 1400 Pacific Time).
I'm specially grateful for the feedback provided by Gnaeus Tarquinius
Caesar, candidate for Tribunus Plebis.
The new version reads as follows:
-------------------------------------------------------
Lex Crylla de securandis magistratus plebis
If no candidates for Tribunus Plebis or Aedilis Plebis declare in December,
within 3 months from the end of the elections, the Senate must provide for
at least one magistrate to occupy each of those magistracies, by appointment
of plebeian citizens. Aspirants to an office should be examined in the
following order of preference:
1 - Candidates to other offices, who have lost in the previous elections;
2 - Magistrates currently serving that office;
3 - Any other citizens;
If after this examination there are still vacancies, the Senate shall
appoint Senators to fill the required magistracies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Tribunus Plebis
|
| Subject: |
Re: Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 08 Dec 1999 12:07:58 -0800 |
|
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=113082020165082153015098190036129" >Exitil@--------</--------; wrote:
> From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=113082020165082153015098190036129" >Exitil@--------</--------;
>
> In a message dated 12/7/99 11:45:46 PM Central Standard Time,
> <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232219108127031050199203252129208071" >amcgrath@--------</a> writes:
>
> >
> > Frankly, I don't care what other "micronations" do. We dwarf most of them
> > in size and we have *real world goals*--they do not.
>
> Real world goals which could have been accomplished long ago with decent
> leadership. Not to mention you plan on being a church more than an actual
> nation. No, I dont want to get the argument started again, I'm just pointing
> it out that Nova Roma is not now, or planning to be, something I would call a
> nation.
Salve,
I tend to disagree....it takes a great deal of planning and financial resources
to purchase, maintain and develop land. If you look in the archives at OneList
you can see a previous discussion on this very issue. I have spoken to you on
AIM, as I know Q. Fabius Maximus on this very issue, yet you fail to understand
the enormity of that process. As my Consular colleague pointed out he feels we
might have land within 10 years, and I agree with that assessment. We dont even
have the numbers to support land development at this time. Nova Roma is not a
Church, as someone who is not a Pagan, I can say that with all honesty.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla
Consul
|
| Subject: |
Re: ATTN PLEBEIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: Comitia Plebis Tributa |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 20:42:24 -0000 |
|
Salve
You are likely to be right. Maybe we have to wait for the current voting to
finish.
Could the curator, rogator or censores clarify?
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
-----Original Message-----
From: George VanDeWater <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=251166234193056045244038203219129208071" >VanDeWGe@--------</a>
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] ATTN PLEBEIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: Comitia
Plebis Tributa
>From: George VanDeWater <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=251166234193056045244038203219129208071" >VanDeWGe@--------</a>
>
>Salve Antonio,
>I am confused. Do we not already have candidates for these positions.?
Hasn't the voting alredy begun? Do those who have voted, go back and vote on
this new version of Lex Crylla?
>
>Valete
>
>>>> "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> 12/08 12:28 PM >>>
>From: "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
>
>Salvete cives
>
>I hereby make the new version of the Lex Crylla de securandis magistratus
>plebis part of the ballot for the Comitia Plebis Tributa. In case it is
>approved, this new version shall be adopted instead of the former lex.
>
>Moreover I extend this Comitia Plebis until:
> -Wednsday, 15 December, 1700 EST (2300 Roman Time, 1400 Pacific Time).
>
>I'm specially grateful for the feedback provided by Gnaeus Tarquinius
>Caesar, candidate for Tribunus Plebis.
>
>The new version reads as follows:
>-------------------------------------------------------
>Lex Crylla de securandis magistratus plebis
>
>If no candidates for Tribunus Plebis or Aedilis Plebis declare in December,
>within 3 months from the end of the elections, the Senate must provide for
>at least one magistrate to occupy each of those magistracies, by
appointment
>of plebeian citizens. Aspirants to an office should be examined in the
>following order of preference:
>1 - Candidates to other offices, who have lost in the previous elections;
>2 - Magistrates currently serving that office;
>3 - Any other citizens;
>If after this examination there are still vacancies, the Senate shall
>appoint Senators to fill the required magistracies.
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>Valete
>Antonius Gryllus Graecus
>Tribunus Plebis
>
>
!
>
!
>
>
>
>>
|
| Subject: |
The Curch of Roma was Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
"RMerullo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 16:36:05 -0500 |
|
Salvete Luci Corneli et alii
Nova Roma isn't a church, but we aspire to be, I think, a sort of
combination of church/state.
I think that Romans do not (and did not) have any churches. Gods may have
temples, but the people do not have churches analogous to those you may find
in Christian America for example, because the public religion was just
that -- public. You wouldn't have to go a special institution on a certain
day of the week to practice religion, because most every facet of public
life would reflect something about the religion. (A Roman living in the
city or near it might have traveled to a particular temple to honor a
particular deity on special occasions, but that is a different experience,
even if done in groups, I think, from the communal experience connoted by
the word church) (This opinion of mine is of course just my opinion, mainly
gleaned from my modest readings in Roman culture, especially Religions of
Rome, and from communication with other people here)
If that's the case, Nova Roma provides (or should strive to provide) a
religious community experience for Romans. Without the religious community
aspect, there is nothing much to hold NR together and give her any form or
substance. (my opinion again of course)
Just as we all as individuals may find the task of putting up with each
other's laws, proposals and political campaigns challenging, NR faces an
enormous challenge in overcoming centuries of demarcation between church and
state, and doing so without aleination of Christians or people of other
faiths.
Di nobis adiuvent
Valete
C Marius Merullus
>From: Lucius Corn--------s Sulla <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a>
>
Nova Roma is not a
>Church, as someone who is not a Pagan, I can say that with all honesty.
>
>Lucius Cornelius Sulla
>Consul
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: The Curch of Roma was Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 21:54:53 -0000 |
|
Salve Merulle
Your view is correct, except for the Mysteries... =)
Vale amice
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
-----Original Message-----
From: RMerullo <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a>
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 9:40 PM
Subject: [novaroma] The Curch of Roma was Other Criticisms To Minimum Age
Law
>From: "RMerullo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a>
>
>Salvete Luci Corneli et alii
>
>Nova Roma isn't a church, but we aspire to be, I think, a sort of
>combination of church/state.
>
>I think that Romans do not (and did not) have any churches. Gods may have
>temples, but the people do not have churches analogous to those you may
find
>in Christian America for example, because the public religion was just
>that -- public. You wouldn't have to go a special institution on a certain
>day of the week to practice religion, because most every facet of public
>life would reflect something about the religion. (A Roman living in the
>city or near it might have traveled to a particular temple to honor a
>particular deity on special occasions, but that is a different experience,
>even if done in groups, I think, from the communal experience connoted by
>the word church) (This opinion of mine is of course just my opinion,
mainly
>gleaned from my modest readings in Roman culture, especially Religions of
>Rome, and from communication with other people here)
>
>If that's the case, Nova Roma provides (or should strive to provide) a
>religious community experience for Romans. Without the religious community
>aspect, there is nothing much to hold NR together and give her any form or
>substance. (my opinion again of course)
>
>Just as we all as individuals may find the task of putting up with each
>other's laws, proposals and political campaigns challenging, NR faces an
>enormous challenge in overcoming centuries of demarcation between church
and
>state, and doing so without aleination of Christians or people of other
>faiths.
>
>Di nobis adiuvent
>
>Valete
>
>C Marius Merullus
>
>
>
>>From: Lucius Corn--------s Sulla <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a>
>>
> Nova Roma is not a
>>Church, as someone who is not a Pagan, I can say that with all honesty.
>>
>>Lucius Cornelius Sulla
>>Consul
>>
>
>>
|
| Subject: |
Re: The Curch of Roma was Other Criticisms To Minimum Age Law |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 08 Dec 1999 13:51:29 -0800 |
|
Salve!
I agree with your view....However, I was directly responding to Extil. Pointing
out we at Nova Roma are something bigger than just a Church. The Religio and
the State are combined. To take one of the picture, the other factor would not
be complete. That is what I meant to say.
L. Cornelius Sulla
RMerullo wrote:
> From: "RMerullo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a>
>
> Salvete Luci Corneli et alii
>
> Nova Roma isn't a church, but we aspire to be, I think, a sort of
> combination of church/state.
>
> I think that Romans do not (and did not) have any churches. Gods may have
> temples, but the people do not have churches analogous to those you may find
> in Christian America for example, because the public religion was just
> that -- public. You wouldn't have to go a special institution on a certain
> day of the week to practice religion, because most every facet of public
> life would reflect something about the religion. (A Roman living in the
> city or near it might have traveled to a particular temple to honor a
> particular deity on special occasions, but that is a different experience,
> even if done in groups, I think, from the communal experience connoted by
> the word church) (This opinion of mine is of course just my opinion, mainly
> gleaned from my modest readings in Roman culture, especially Religions of
> Rome, and from communication with other people here)
>
> If that's the case, Nova Roma provides (or should strive to provide) a
> religious community experience for Romans. Without the religious community
> aspect, there is nothing much to hold NR together and give her any form or
> substance. (my opinion again of course)
>
> Just as we all as individuals may find the task of putting up with each
> other's laws, proposals and political campaigns challenging, NR faces an
> enormous challenge in overcoming centuries of demarcation between church and
> state, and doing so without aleination of Christians or people of other
> faiths.
>
> Di nobis adiuvent
>
> Valete
>
> C Marius Merullus
>
> >From: Lucius Corn--------s Sulla <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a>
> >
> Nova Roma is not a
> >Church, as someone who is not a Pagan, I can say that with all honesty.
> >
> >Lucius Cornelius Sulla
> >Consul
> >
>
>
|
| Subject: |
Changing a Law before the People for a Vote. |
| From: |
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045232113165042200148200112241225012177026038196249130152150" >jmath669642reng@--------</a> (James Mathe--------/td>
|
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 18:50:09 -0500 (EST) |
|
Salvete, Citizens;
I would tend to think that once a law had been placed onto a ballot that
it must be voted upon as it is. If there is a problem with the law then
it must either fail of approval or pass approval and be re-submitted for
further change at a later time. Since voters have already voted on the
law, changes cannot be made to the law, since that violates the voting
rights of early voters.
I submit to the Consuls of Nova Roma that the above decision must be
undertaken to be finalized by them, and submitted to the Senate as
necessary for confirmaton.
In this message I do not speak for or against the law, but rather speak
to the voting procedure in which the law will be decided.
Valete, Citizens;
Very Respectfully;
Marcus Minucius Audens;
Praetor et Senator.
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Book announcement |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 18:41:55 -0800 |
|
Salve!
I found this post on USENET and I thought many of you folks might be interested in this....This is cut and pasted from the Usenet article.
Vale!
L. Cornelius Sulla
Consul
____________________________
Book Announcement
The Road To Eleusis: Unveiling the Secret of the Mysteries, by R. G.
Wasson, Albert Hofmann, and Carl Ruck, with a preface by Huston Smith
and afterword by Albert Hofmann, "The Message of the Eleusinian
Mysteries for Todayıs World," is available in a limited 20th Anniversary
edition hardcover from William Dailey Rare Books in Los Angeles,
<--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=100071114009110162169061163248147208071048" >Antiqu----------------</--------;, <--------ef="http://www.bibliocity.com/de--------s/d--------y/" t--------t="_top" >http://www.bibliocity.com/de--------s/d--------y/</--------;, ----------------
from Mind Books, <a href="http://www.promind.com/bk_rte.htm" target="_top" >http://www.promind.com/bk_rte.htm</a>.
This seminal text on the psychedelic foundations of Western philosophy
first appeared in 1978, immediately sold out, and was never reprinted
till this edition Hermes Press published in cooperation with the R. G.
Wasson Estate and Harvard University Botanical Museum, the keeper of his
archives.
Jonathan Ott writes, "Thanks to Wassonıs perspicacity we have here
another astonishing chapter in the history of ethnomycology which for
the first time places the sacred mushroom in our own cultural past."
Huston Smith calls The Road to Eleusis "a historical tour de force while
being more than that. For by direct implication it raises contemporary
questions that our cultural establishment has thus far deemed too hot to
face."
Terence McKenna wrote "The ideas which the authors -- the banker, the
chemist, and the Classicist -- put forth have been largely unchallenged
and ignored by specialists in the culture of ancient and classical
GreeceS This seems to fulfill the rule of thumb that when ideas are
controversial they are discussed, when they are revolutionary, they are
ignored."
Octavio Paz: "Gordon Wasson has made the specialty of mycology
something of universal importance and one of the pillars of anthropology
and history of religions."
For a review see
<a href="http://omega.cohums.ohio-state.edu:8080/hyper-lists/classics-l/99-03-01/0" target="_top" >http://omega.cohums.ohio-state.edu:8080/hyper-lists/classics-l/99-03-01/0</a>
196.html
|
| Subject: |
Re: ATTN PLEBEIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: Comitia Plebis Tributa |
| From: |
"Gaius Marius Merullus" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Dec 1999 22:16:02 -0500 |
|
Salvete Tribune Antoni Grylle et alii
I don't speak for the censores or any other magistrate. I have been unable
to
consult T Labienus Fortunatus, so I cannot speak collegially for the
rogatores. If he is reading this, I invite him to answer as well.
I do not, however, see any way that we rogatores could sort through multiple
votes cast by the same voters to figure out which ones were valid, and which
invalid. For each voter code, there can be only one vote, otherwise we have
no basis on which to count votes.
In light of this, and also for the sake of voters' confidence in the
process, I would advise all magistrates whereever possible to refrain from
revision of laws after an assembly has been convened. Since this is the
first year of consitutional voting assemblies, though, some deviation is
pretty understandable, especially in light of the extremely brief discussion
period leading up to the assemblies.
In the case of the privacy law, for instance. It was posted about two days
before voting was to begin, right? If we had seen it a week earlier, we
could have made suggestions that much sooner, revisions would not have been
needed literally on the eve of the assembly.
But again, this is kind of understandable. After all, Sulla was just
elected consul a few short months ago and had to help organize the praetor
election with other legislation, et cetera; in other words, he was dropped
onto terra incognita like a paratrooper and expected to hit the ground
already running and shooting.
I would say, once voting has begun, let's not touch the text of any
proposals up for voting. It is your call to make, Antoni Grylle.
Valete
C Marius Merullus
rogator
>
>You are likely to be right. Maybe we have to wait for the current voting to
>finish.
>
>Could the curator, rogator or censores clarify?
>
>Valete
>Antonius Gryllus Graecus
>
|
