Subject:	RE: Probus's post
From:	hadji <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=180166080058082135090082190036" >hadji@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:06:49 +0100

Salvete omnes,

I would like to join all my replies to the current discussions into this
one note. It will save time and place.

Sulla wrote:
<<of the 1% tax.
Sorry, its a bit unrealistic for a few reasons.>>

I know that and agree with you. I just wanted to present another point
of view and to accent that there are different ways how to interpret the
equality or fairness of taxation. Probably the best solution would be a
combination of different taxating methods for different provinces.
Actually I am sure all of us (including Sarmaticus) will accept the
decision of our Senate.

As for Sarmaticus, who left the list, I will try to bring him back. I
consider him as a very valuable citizen, who is doing the best he can
for Sarmatian NR citizens. I do not think he is rebelling against "mos
maoirum" of our republic, but only is asking questions by not very
appropriate way. OK, he is too temperament and not very diplomatic, but
I will always prefer him as a Nova Roman partner instead of any Russian
oligarch (that is the term Merullo prefers, that one I always use for
such persons is much sharper) who have no problems with paying any
amount of money. I would like to share you too that such persons as
Sarmaticus (active but with some wider interests than only money
earning) are very rare in eastern Europe. Perdominant number of peoples
here are interested by nothing else than basic life needs and such
abstract or virtual things as Roman history (or religion) etc. Even
those one who are interested to join us are so hestiated or ashamed that
there is no way to force them to enter our discussions and to join our
forums. Some of them are ashamed because of their not good English (even
peoples whose English is much much better than mine), some considers
their knowledge of Roman Virtues on a very law level (even their
knowledges level is higher than my one) etc etc.

So let us be a little bit more patient to newcommers. If one joined us
he/she is probably wanting to comunicate with us and to find new
friends.

Dex, I know you never do wanted to insult anyone. I politly ask you not
to bite Sarmaticus for a while and the fire will burn it alone. I hope
you understand me.

Bene valete

Alexander I.C. Probus

Subject:	Re: Digest Number 711
From:	Decius Iunius Palladius <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232219108127031050199203252129208071" >amcgrath@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 03:33:42 -0500 (EST)

Salvete, Wading through all these messages, I found a few things I must
comment on:

On 28 Jan 2000 <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> wrote:

> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 23:11:56 -0800
> From: Lucius Corn--------s Sulla <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a>
> Subject: [Fwd: Proposed Legislation]
>
> Salvete Civies! The Following proposed legislation was brought before the
> Senate of Nova Roma on April 5, 1999. This legislation was created by Q.
> Fabius Maximus, M. Municius Audens and myself.
>
> L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Censor

Just to let the citizenry know, the tax proposal Sulla posted is not the
current one before the senate and has not been presented to the current
senate. In fact, no actual tax proposal is currently before the
senate. Senate item # 5 is a vaguely worded proposal that states the
following:

"That we begin to impose a tax on all the citizens of Nova
Roma. While I realize, conscript fathers, that this measure will be
unpopular, will not pass on the first attempt, and will cause a major
restructure in Nova Roma's charter, I Q. Fabius am still committed to
it. Your vote simply means that this senate is committed or is not
committed to this task."

Essentially, the senate is debating whether to debate on an actual tax
proposal that will perhaps be presented later on. We do not know the
form it will take. If the current proposal passes, which is in serious
doubt, it imposes nothing on Nova Roma or its people. It imposes nothing
on the senate but an obligation to consider any tax proposal put before
us, which we would have had to do in any case. Confusing? Yes. One could
say we are debating the idea of taxes but that discussion will really come
when the first actual proposal is presented to us. In other words, taxes
are not inevitble (nothing is inevitable in politics) and in any
event, they are not in our immediate future. At least they are not on the
current agenda. One thing is clear, the senate has no clear idea yet of
what should be done (to tax or not to tax, that is the question) and is
open to suggestions and comments from any citizen. The discussion here is
being followed with interest, if not difficulty because of the sheer
volume of messages.

> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 02:04:02 -0800
> From: Lucius Corn--------s Sulla <a hr--------/post/novaroma?prot--------D=243128192154082190130232203077129208071" >al--------us@--------</a>
> Subject: Re: Re: Senate Item #5
> "A. Artorius Arius Sarmaticus" wrote:
> > From: "A. Artorius Arius Sarmaticus" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=061166091213158134036102228219114187071048139" >sarmaticus@--------</a>
> > >From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=132056131009152219130232203140129208071" >Dexippus@--------</--------;
> > >
> > >Why should I, as a Patrician, have to pay taxes for one year if there is no
> > >real class distinction in NR?
> >
> > Is it? I'd like to ask then, has anyone an information how many of NR's high
> > magistarates was earleir and are now Patricians? What was the proportion
> > between Patricians and Plebeians among consuls, censors, praetors and
> > quaestors? And if compared with total population's proportions? Perhaps
> > there *is* "real class distinction in NR" if the proportion ampng high
> > magistrates is/was in the past/ say 10:1 in favour to Patricians, I don't
> > know...
> >
>
> Salve, Just to let you know the first 30 Gens that signed up for Nova Roma
> had the choice to become Patrician or Plebian. Most became
> Patrician. This was the
> case til we got 30 Gens in the Patrician Slot. So in essence, all of us
> Patricians were co-founders helping to establish Nova Roma with a firm
> foundation of civic involvement. There have been 2 Gens's that were promoted
> from Plebian status to the Patrician status. First was the Fabii Gens, headed
> by Q. Fabius Maximus. The second was the Municia Gens headed by M. Municus
> Audens. So in essence you can say our current Consuls have a solid
> grounding in
> both the Plebian and Patrician aspects of Nova Roma. Both, I believe, were
> awarded Patrician status due to their actions on behalf of Nova Roma.


Just a small correction to the order of the two gentes mentioned by my
friend, Lucius Cornelius. The gens Minucia was elevated to patrician
status before the gens Fabia. About 6 months before as I recall. Minucia
was made patrician at the end of 1998 by the censors and the senate in
recognition of service. In mid 1999, Fabia was graciously elevated by
Flavius Vedius during his dictatorship in recognition of service.


Valete,

Decius Iunius Palladius,
Senator, etc.

Subject:	A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:	hadji <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=180166080058082135090082190036" >hadji@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 12:31:04 +0100

Once Nova Roma had made the great mistake to open her doors for the
"easterners" all of you may suffer now the influence of different
heretical non-orthodox cults. I would like to share you somthing about
ancient Thracian/Greek Orpheism.It was so interesting for me that I will
allow myself to bore you with such a issue.

"Everithing is created from a Materia and returns back to it" said
Museus the Orpheus' pupil. There were different orphician versions about
The Beginning in the ancient times and it is difficult to choose which
one is the eldest cosmogonian version. The most popular was probably
that one which considers The Night as the very first beginning. Another
one cosidered about The Water or other different solid substance, which
from was created the silt and later it became solid and was created the
Earth from.

Subject:	Donations
From:	Pat Washburn <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197063113185056135042082190036" >p--------@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 07:40:31 -0500

Quoth Nova Roma Mailing List:

>
>Are checks to be made payable to Nova Roma?

Yes. Thank you!

(That address again, for those who were deleting info during the
snowstorm between Dex and Sarmaticus: P.O. Box 1897, Wells, ME 04090. The
Treasury thanks you for your support.)



Patricia Cassia . Quaestor, Nova Roma
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=197063113185056135042082190036" >p--------@--------</a>

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:03:01 -0000

Salvete Alexander et al


"Ex Oriens Lux!"

>Once Nova Roma had made the great mistake to open her doors for the
>"easterners" all of you may suffer now the influence of different
>heretical non-orthodox cults.
Mistake? Non-orthodox? I cannot agree.
This brings to <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> a philosophical discussion between me
and Nicolaus Moravius Vado about the Religio, Neoplatonism, etc. that we
have been having in the ReligioRomana mailing list.
It is my belief that to open the doors for the "easterners" was a natural
consequence of the expansion of Rome and its acceptance by many different
peoples and cultures. While mainly concerned with the Roman state as a
whole, the plain Roman state religion did not have the answer to all the
problems and questions of the individual human being. Foreign beliefs and
philosophical theories brought answers to the more intimate questions of the
individual, while being assimilated by the Religio Romana. Not that those
questions and answers were not present in the principles of Roman religion
since the beginning, but simply that there was no feeling or conscience of
it.
Instead of cursing foreign influence, we should praise the open spirit of
Roman culture for being able to assimilate other cultures so easily, not
destroying them, but learning with them. It was the individual Roman
citizen, soldier, matron, who accepted that influence since the very
beginning. They were able to identify the Roman Gods in foreign regions, for
each God has different names in different tongues. I remind Sabine, Etruscan
deities assimilated to Rome in the very begining of Its existence.
Maybe we should not blame the eastern influence itself for the ultimate fall
of Rome. We sould instead blame the corruption of a political system, the
alienation imposed to the people, the lack of true pietas either towards
official or foreign religion. Whether eastern knowledge was misused, that is
not fault of the knowledge itself. To assimilate does not mean to forget. I
cannot see any contradiction. In fact official and foreign cults were either
equivalent or complementary.
To finish, remind that it was an Phrygian Goddess Who freed Rome from
Hannibal: Cybele, Magna Mater. So many battles were won by Mithras, Sol
Invictus, Iuppiter Dolichenus? Remind that it was a Roman God of Eastern
influence (Sol Invictus) Who gathered the energy of All official and foreign
pagan Roman deities to fight the last battle against christian intolerance
in the 4th century AD.

>I would like to share you somthing about
>ancient Thracian/Greek Orpheism.It was so interesting for me that I will
>allow myself to bore you with such a issue.
I've forwarded it to the <a href="mailto:ReligioRomana@--------" >ReligioRomana@--------</a> official religious
mailing list of NR. Orphic cosmogony and theogony was very well explained.
Please post your religious material there.

Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex

Subject:	Re: RE: Probus's post
From:
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:56:38 EST

In a message dated 1/31/00 3:16:27 AM Eastern Standard Time,
<a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=180166080058082135090082190036" >hadji@--------</a> write--------r>
<< Dex, I know you never do wanted to insult anyone. I politly ask you not
to bite Sarmaticus for a while and the fire will burn it alone. I hope
you understand me. >>

Hey...I was not biting Sarmaticus. I viewed it as a friendly on-going debate
until he and others made it out not to be.

I have since let the debate go as all points have been covered and now NR
just has to vote on the proposal at hand.

--Dex

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 14:03:13 EST

In a message dated 1/31/00 6:40:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,
<a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=180166080058082135090082190036" >hadji@--------</a> write--------r>
<< The first sin inherited from the Titans is necessary to be expiated by
prayers and Dionissius only could free humans. All the peoples have the
divine beginning of Dionissus, but it could be choked if peoples live
unjustice way of life (as Dexipus :))). >>

First...this "sin" sounds too Judeo-Christian to me to be palatable.

And Second...still insulting your way on this list, eh Hadji? So I live an
"unjustice way of life"? Because I debated with Samarticus?

I'll say it again...and to the detriment of Fimbria...GET OVER YOURSELF!
(I'll hold the sharper tongue for your reply).

--Dex

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:43:12 -0000

Salvete Dexippus et al

><< The first sin inherited from the Titans is necessary to be expiated by
> prayers and Dionissius only could free humans. All the peoples have the
> divine beginning of Dionissus, but it could be choked if peoples live
> unjustice way of life (as Dexipus :))). >>
>
>First...this "sin" sounds too Judeo-Christian to me to be palatable.
Not Judeo-Christian. The Orphics (at least some of them) believed that
punishment in Hades could only be avoided through having a just life. This
would mean that our divine part of the soul would approach the devine realm
even during life abandoning the 'titanic' part. This theory was well
accepted by many Romans and numerous roman sarcophaggi bear the depiction of
the 'titanomachy' or 'gigantomachy' as an artistic motif to remind us of our
2 opposed parts. There is a third part that can follow one or another of
those natures, which is Reason.

Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:01:52 EST

This is nothing new. The wicked are punished in Tartarus and the Heros (and
the just) are awarded in the Eliesian Fields.

But "sin"? I'm skeptical of that concept.

--Dex

In a message dated 1/31/00 2:19:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> writes:

<< Not Judeo-Christian. The Orphics (at least some of them) believed that
punishment in Hades could only be avoided through having a just life. This
would mean that our divine part of the soul would approach the devine realm
even during life abandoning the 'titanic' part. This theory was well
accepted by many Romans and numerous roman sarcophaggi bear the depiction of
the 'titanomachy' or 'gigantomachy' as an artistic motif to remind us of our
2 opposed parts. There is a third part that can follow one or another of
those natures, which is Reason. >>

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 19:57:14 -0000

Salvete

>This is nothing new. The wicked are punished in Tartarus and the Heros
(and
>the just) are awarded in the Eliesian Fields.
>
>But "sin"? I'm skeptical of that concept.
Yes, the word is not appropriate in this context.

Antonius Gryllus Graecus




<--------lass="msghead"> &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=034166250009056116130232203056129208071" &g--------bienus@--------&l--------&g--------td>

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 14:38:27 US/Central

Salve Dexippe

> This is nothing new.  The wicked are punished in Tartarus and the Heros (and
> the just) are awarded in the Eliesian Fields.
>
> But "sin"?  I'm skeptical of that concept.

A sin is simply a violation of religious or moral law. The word isn't limited
to Christianity. "The wicked" in Tartarus could be referred to as "the
sinners" just as correctly.

Vale,
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 20:20:04 -0000

>A sin is simply a violation of religious or moral law. The word isn't
limited
>to Christianity. "The wicked" in Tartarus could be referred to as "the
>sinners" just as correctly.
Yes, I agree. This is in fact the definition of 'peccatus': to do wrong.

Antonius Gryllus Graecus

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:03:53 EST

In a message dated 1/31/00 3:39:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
&l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=034166250009056116130232203056129208071" &g--------bienus@--------&l--------&g--------ri--------

<<
A sin is simply a violation of religious or moral law. The word isn't
limited
to Christianity. "The wicked" in Tartarus could be referred to as "the
sinners" just as correctly. >>

Is this the case in historic writing? I've never seen such refer to as
"sinners". It's always been "the wicked".

I've never come across "sin" except in terms of Judeo-Christian-Muslim
writing.

--Dex



<--------lass="msghead"> labienus &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=034166250009056116130232203056129208071" &g--------bienus@--------&l--------&g--------td>

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:18:21 -0600

Salve Dexippe

> <<
> A sin is simply a violation of religious or moral law. The word isn't
> limited to Christianity. "The wicked" in Tartarus could be referred
> to as "the
> sinners" just as correctly. >>
>
> Is this the case in historic writing? I've never seen such refer to
> as
> "sinners". It's always been "the wicked".
>
> I've never come across "sin" except in terms of Judeo-Christian-Muslim
>
> writing.

"Sin" is originally an Old English word.with prehistoric Germanic
origins. Although its ultimate beginnings are unclear, it has been
linked with the Latin "sons", which means "guilty".

In any case, as an English word with origins in the Middle Ages, it has,
unsurprisingly, been primarily associated with Christian sin. And, it
is true that one of the word's meanings implies a kind of deliberate
removal from God that is entirely Christian. I have read a number of
historical documents, mostly modern translations of Medieval
translations of Classical texts, which use the word sin for religious
wrongdoing. I'd be willing to try to dig a few of them out if it really
means that much to you.

In any case, it is certainly true that the word is not tied to any
specific religion in modern English.

Vale,
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	Re: A non orthodox eastern Pagan stuff (long)
From:	Megas-Rob--------n <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232178182078116015056190036129" >amgunn@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 20:04:39 -0600

Avete Omnes,

Venator scripsit:

Antonio Grilo wrote:
>
> From: "Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
>
> >A sin is simply a violation of religious or moral law. The word isn't
> limited
> >to Christianity. "The wicked" in Tartarus could be referred to as
> "the
> >sinners" just as correctly.
> Yes, I agree. This is in fact the definition of 'peccatus': to do
> wrong.
>
> Antonius Gryllus Graecus
>

And if I may add my understanding of the Northern Heathen view of "sin."

The concept of good and evil seems simpler in some ways than the view of
Mediterranean cultures: that which helps family and community is good,
that which does not is bad. Also, the heathen world view is based upon
building up one's past through actions: right action having a positive
outcome is good, wrong action having a negative outcome is bad, but
inaction which produces nothing is worst of all. "We are our deeds" is
an often quoted maxim in many heathen conversations on good, evil and
the Germanic-Nordic worldview.

Which enters into the Heathen concept of time. The Past, that which has
become - The Present, that which is becoming, the Future, that which
shall become, entailing for sure only those things which the weight of
the Past "forces" into being. In exemplia: the Sun shall rise in the
morning because the planet was set into rotation in the Past. Because,
I think, the Future is a set of actions which are obliged to happen and
one has no individual control over these actions, the Northern peoples
(linguisticly at least) had no clear future tense in language: i.e.
"Last night I rode," Today I ride," "Tonight I ride." The future looks
to have been spoken of in terms of the Present, and even now future
tenses in Germanic languages are compound verbs rather than true tenses
in and of themselves, "Tonight I shall ride."

So, in the Heathen worldview one is always in an ever changing Present,
looking to build up a worthy Past and the Future takes care of itself.

I view my association with Nova Roma as a worthy, right action.

I hope this adds to the conversation.

In Amicus - Venator

Subject:	Re: Re: Non Orthodox Eastern Pagan Stuff
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:36:44 -0000

Salvete Moravi et al

>Answer me this, O ye orientalising syncretists: has Mithras Helios Sol
>Invictus Horus Sarapis Optimus Maximus ever helped you find your car-keys?
Oh yes! Apollo and Hermes, which are parts of Him, have helped me a lot to
find keys and other stuff.
To be a syncretist is not to deny the Gods. It's just to invoke them all at
the same time as an entity with all powers.

Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus

Subject:	Orientalism
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:51:08 -0000

Salvete

I was writing an article on the Religio and the Mysteries for the Eagle, and
decided to include an excerpt here. After stating that oriental cults,
specially the mystery cults made an addition to the traditional Roman
religion I write a note:

"I have used the word addition because it is my belief that the characters
of Roman and Mystery cults were either equivalent (in this case the foreign
deity would often adopt the Roman name, e.g. the Baal of Doliche became
known as Iuppiter Dolichenus) or complementary (in this case both systems
would coexist together). Influence occurred in both directions. Decadence of
traditional Roman cults was not the consequence of any incompatibility with
foreign cults. It was rather the consequence of the little attention given
by the Imperial authorities in a time when the Roman world had assimilated
many different peoples and cultures. The Imperial authorities had introduced
a new state religion of a totally different character: the cult of the
deified Emperor."

In fact, no other oriental cult (for the cult of the deified sovereign was
also of oriental origin) was as spread as the Imperial cult. Every province
had Imperial temples and religious officers. The Imperial cult have in fact
replaced the main function of traditional Roman religion: to oversee the
affairs of the Roman State and Nation as a whole.

Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus