Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Chats, official and not
From:	<gmvick32@-------->
Date:	Tue, 05 Sep 2000 20:15:54 -0600


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Chats, official and not
From:	"Razenna " <razenna@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 02:42:50 -0000

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9067/8/_/61050/_/968208181/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

There must be some capability to handle the clientele. Perhaps
somebody might not want to call it a "moderator", but even a rowdy
taverna has someone. The publican and/or the bouncer. Or it will
get
over run with nasties off the street and it will have to be shut
down.
But y'all do what you want. When there was the so called "Back
Alley" list I stayed away fromit because I didn't like some
significant parts of the clientele and damn near none of the
behavior.
I seldom go int the prest chat room anymore, the Forum Romanum that
is also called the Taverna, due to... well it isn't so much the
people
in there, or what is said -- I can also leave, you know -- but the
spies.

C. Aelius Ericius.
{C. as in Caius, not Gaius. A more archaic form.
(Dr. A.L.Becker-Colonna)]

--- In novaroma@--------, Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@c...>
wrote:
> > I wonder if "Atrium" might be a suitable name for the chat room?
That
> > is, our "public room" where we discourse on all manner of
subjects,
> > but aware that we are not doing so privately, and that some
standards
> > of decorum pertain?
>
> Salve Patricia Cassia,
>
> I prefer "Forum Romanum" for the official, semi-moderated chat
area.
The
> word "forum", in modern times, is commonly used for such things
even
by
> people entirely ignorant of where it came from. To us, it also
brings
> to mind the place where debates and political rallies were held.
>
> There could also continue to be a "Taverna" for less-refined
discussions -
> a place for complaints, dirty jokes, and rants against various
authority
> figures. In this area no one would have moderator powers.
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't yet had time to set up the tools I was
wanting
> to use to build this new chat system, so it's still a few months in
the
> future.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Curule Aedile, Nova Roma
> Microsoft delenda est!
> http://www.graveyards.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] Gratulor vobis
From:	Piscinus@--------
Date:	Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:35:27 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Gratulor vobis
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:44:51 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] Congradulations
From:	Piscinus@--------
Date:	Tue, 5 Sep 2000 23:48:00 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] New Semester and idea
From:	"Lauriat" <blauriat@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 00:16:16 -0400


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] New Semester and idea
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:37:24 -0700

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9067/8/_/61050/_/968215048/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Ave, I think this is a great idea!!! :) Outstanding. This should be a goal
of NR to have a presence in most if not all college's! If there is
anything I could do to assist you please dont hesistate to ask!

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lauriat" <blauriat@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->; <egressus@-------->
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 9:16 PM
Subject: [novaroma] New Semester and idea

>
> Salvete all!
>
> As you may not have noticed, I have been absent from the list for awhile.
I have been in the process of moving, decorating my room with columns and
Pompeii red, and getting ready for a new semester of classical studies here
at Boston University. I am going to be taking two Latin classes (one
focusing on religious passages in Livy, the other on the Somnium Scipionis
if anyone wants to discuss these topics at any point) one Ancient Greek
class and another interesting class on Topics in Myth and the Ancient World.
'Tis the first semester of my last year here, how sad...
> Not that I plan to enter the real world next year. I plan to study
ancient dead people for as long as people continue to fund me. : )
> Now, I had an idea. I realize that it may have been thought and shot down
long ago but I thought I'd throw it out there nevertheless. This is the time
of year when new student groups can register for official standing and
school funding. I was wondering if it would be possible to make a
collegiate "club" of Nova Roma, in which students could become Nova Roman
citizens, participate in Roman-oriented activities and get funded by their
schools. I would be happy to put in the time and effort to attempt to start
a first one of these groups at BU if I were sanctioned to do so. What are
people's opinions on this subject? Also, how would Nova Roma sanction and/or
legitimize collegiate versions that would be ultimately under the control of
the academic institution? Also, if people think this is an idea that might
be beneficial to Nova Roma, how do they feel about BU as a starting place (I
know there are at least a few Nova Roman alums)?
> I won't be at all offended if cives think this is a miserable idea. Just
if people do want me to do this, I need to know as soon as possible so I can
get the paperwork in, recruit people, and attend the appropriate meetings.
>
> Regards,
> Lauria Maria
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>


Subject:	Fw: [novaroma] Gratulor vobis
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:39:56 -0700

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9067/8/_/61050/_/968215200/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Oops....this new system..LOL
----- Original Message -----
From: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
To: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Gratulor vobis

> Let me restate my post incase it is unclear. The Censors make the
> determination in regards to adding and removing Senators, this is found in
> the Lex Vedia Senatoria. C. Marius Merullus and myself have not added any
> new Senators. The vote was only for the Seante to recommend citizens.
Til
> my colleague and I decide on this issue, there has been no change in
regard
> to the number of Senators in Nova Roma. I hope this post clears up any
> misconception.
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Censor
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
> To: <novaroma@-------->
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 8:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [novaroma] Gratulor vobis
>
>
> >
> > Ave,
> >
> > I have contacted my colleague in this matter, but let me state that the
> vote
> > was for Senatorial recommendation. Under the Lex Vedia Senatoria (sp.)
> new
> > Senators are added by the Censors. To this date we, C. Marius Merullus
> and
> > myself have not even met to discuss this matter. As a matter of fact,
> both
> > Merullus and myself abstained from that vote.
> >
> > I just wanted to clarify this to the People of Nova Roma.
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> > Censor of Nova Roma
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <Piscinus@-------->
> > To: <novaroma@-------->
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 8:35 PM
> > Subject: [novaroma] Gratulor vobis
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Gn. Moravius Piscinus salutem plurimam valde dicit Senatoribus N.
> Moravio
> > > Vado, et M. Marcio Rex, et M. Octavio Germanico, clarissimi viri.
> > Gratulatio
> > > vobis mitto. Deae dique Novae Romae vos semper salvom et servatum
> volunt.
> > >
> > > Congradulations to our newest Senators, the most honorable N.
> Moravius
> > > Vado, M. Marcius Rex, and M. Octavious Germanicus. May the goddesses
> and
> > > gods of Nova Roma always wish you safe and sound.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1001
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 01:38:56 -0400 (EDT)

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9067/8/_/61050/_/968218738/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete, My Friends;

Alas, I too miss those long and beautiful summer days when a pot of cool
Falernian in the shady side of the Taverna stood ready to refresh at my
right hand, and the folds of my toga fell from thier dignified drapery
and I lolled in luxery upon a cool marble bench while listening to the
bees hummng in the sweet smelling flowers by the open door..

A quiet supper of crayfish and a bowl of sweet cherries added to the
magic as I listened to the creak of the tiny ceatures in the garden and
the whisper of the wind, blowing across the open well-head.

Here was a place where my friends came to share wine and the cool quiet
of an out-of-the way garden. If there were lurkers, they saw the
relaxed atmosphere of the wine-pot and friendly chat, and the most
dangerous thing in ths venue was the bumblebee's stinger as he lumbered
about the blossoms by the corner of the tiled well.

The flagstones baked hot in the afternoon sun, but the marble benches
were cool to the touch inside the Taverna and a breeze usually wafted
the perfumed scent of a thousand flower petals from nearby gardens. The
outside street noise was muted by the intervening brick walls, and the
sweeper's brooms were the only noise that disturbed the lazy afternoons
as they slowly vented into a purple dusk, and the lamps of the nearby
houses winked in the darkness like promises in the night sky.

As the night folded around the city like a dark cloth and the shadows
became deeper within the tavern, the lamps were lighted one by one
leaving a glowing golden hollow where the darkness was denied it's
rightful place. Peace, Tranquility, the sweet taste of a fine
Falurnian, and the soft murmur of friend's voices were there to sooth
the senses and soften the day's hard edges.

We give up too much in our pursuit of wealth and glory,---- too much by
far!!!!

Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary


Subject:	[novaroma] Ideas vs Ideology
From:	"Marcus Sententiosus Lupis" <dwolfman@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 06:51:48 -0000

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/968223110/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete,
As of late I have not posted, however this does not mean I
have not been here for I have been observing while attending to
matters of my job and school. In the past few weeks I noticed our
fine republica debate on important issues. Citizneship is rightly a
topic of paramount import. I believe an open discourse on this is a
wonderful thing. It is my thoughtthe civics, the civic virtu`, has
great value to us today. In my opinion the general sense of civics
has been lost in modern society, so that citizenship is seen as a
right to ask the government for services rather than the citizens'
duty to participate for the greater good. On this note I would like
to say I have done my duty and voted (as a citizen of the USA that
is).
On that other hand I must take issue on another recent thread
of posts. Some time ago there was a call for "noteable Romans" and at
the time I thought it was a delightful idea. That was until there
appeared posts began appearing that attacked some of the candidates
on the list of notables, and this spawned questions of the moral
character of those mentioned Romans such as Caesar and and Marius,
who by definition are notable. That was what was asked for notable
Romand for ill and good. There were other post that, in my opinion,
displayed a very one sided and intolerant view concerning the nature
of who was a "true Roman". I was so offended that I stopped posted
name of historic Romans, and even stopped posting altogether. Now
another post has me so frustrated that I could not be stopped to post
my thoughts on the matter. This is of course the post on fascism. I
feel that the creator of the post wanted to air their views on
politics and economic philosophy. That in itself is not a problem,
but it becomes a problem when this view is at the point of being
inflicted upon others. There is no one pure or true philosophy or
system of government. Political philosophical ideals are simply that,
ideals and do not exist in the real world. The complexity of dealing
with humans in soceity neccisates not one all encompassing ideology,
but several different methods for dealing with many issues. To say
democracy is doomed to fail is partially true, in that if one follows
only one view or system that will not meet the challenge of the
future since such is system becomes stagnant, dogmatic and unable to
adapt to change. To use Greek democracy as an example of a failed
system would be a false use of history. Athenian democracy was not a
true, or pure democracy and nor is the American system. Within the
American federal republic there are elements of democracy,
dictatorship, militarism, nationalism, and socialism. I would like
to point out to the person who wrote that communism (at least
communism in its original form concieved by Marx and not the
communism of the later Bolsviek Movement) has not been tried, I must
correct that by saying it was attempted and failed. In Israel of the
early 40s up until the 70s a series of communal farms/villages called
kubitz (forgive if that spelling is in error). The kubitz is the
closest approximation of Marx' utopian vision of a classless, self
sufficient, and self contained soceity. However this experiement
proved that a comminty no matter how small can not be wholly self
contained, self suffient or for that matter classless. Corruption and
need for importing of goods ended the communes.
Now to say that the Roman Empire was fascist is a half truth.
For the Republic and the early part of the Empire the army was
composed of conscripts, in other words citizen soldiers who were a
militia. Roman citizenship (like Athenian citizenship) was intially
granted only ot those peoples living in the City but then all
Italians were citizens. Citizenship in the empire was granted to
those under the rule of Rome be they foreign or born outside of the
City. Many Romans lived and died never living, nor even seeing the
City itself. Race, religion, nationality was not a factor. A citizen
was considered just that, a citizen with all the privilages and
duties that comes with it. I do not appreciate any comments
suggesting that Galen, Polybuis, or Josephus were "token" citizens as
if there contributions meant nothing because they were of foriegn
birth. I am not blind to the fact that the Romans exhibited elitism,
but the Particans considered the Plebians lower thant they even
though both groups were citizens, hence foriegn citizens had to deal
with a certain level of biggotry, but they were citizens. Rome's
Empire was vast and in the City it was a true metropolitan and
multicultural city. It is not the fact that everyone was equall or
even considered equal it was the fact that opportunities existed. A
slave could become a senator, a foreirgner could become a Senator,
and women could hold proffesions such as doctors and artisans. These
examples are the exception to the majority but it is the fact that it
could happen at all showed the level of acceptance and tolence that
Rome had. Only later on did the army mass into a true standing army
with more foriegn auxilliries serving in tis ranks to form a
mercanary army. Rome subsidized Egyptian wheat farms so they could
produce a surplus. This surplus was used to feed the citizens of the
city of Rome for free. The Senate was not completely without power if
in the Empire, and at a certain point the Praetorian Guard was the
true power and not the Emperor so it became a struggle for who really
ran the Empire and in the end the militarism and growing intolerance
caused many of Rome's citizen to literally open the gates to the
barbarians. On that note is was not the barbarians from the Germanic
tribes that caused mass destruciton and slaughter, it was the slaves.
I did not write this to berate or condemn any indivdual or author of
posts. I am writing to speak to all in NR to be tolerant and to aware
of differing points of view. I would be negligent and dishonest if I
were to say I was without bias, however I strive to look at as many,
if not all perspectives. Issues of race, gender, and sexual
orientation are highly charged with emotion and are extremely
complicated. There are no simple solutions for complex problems and I
endeavor not to generalize or make blanket statements to say there
would be one "hard and fast" rule for real life issues. I will end
this message with a piece of wisdom I recieved for my mother. She
said to me the foundation for any relationship, be it friendship or
marriage, is respect. Tolerence is aknowledging the differences and
also respecting those differences in individuals and in groups.

May we be human enough to forgive, learn, and survive from the
mistakes of being human,
Marcus Sententiosus Lupis


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Senate Vote results
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 07:31:58 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] Congratulations
From:	DTibbe2926@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 08:56:29 EDT

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Free @Backup service! Click here for your free trial of @Backup.
@Backup is the most convenient way to securely protect and access
your files online. Try it now and receive 300 MyPoints.
http://click.egroups.com/1/6348/8/_/61050/_/968245003/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

EX DOMO PROCURATORIS BRITANNIAE

My heartiest congratulations to Nicolaus Moravius Vado on his elevation to
the Senate.

I look forward to his wisdom and energy being used for the greater good of
all Nova Roma, as we have benefited in the province of Britannia.

Publius Claudius Lucentius Severus Bicurratus
Procuratoris Britanniae


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: [Egressus] New Semester and idea
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 13:40:06 GMT


Subject:	[novaroma] New Conscript Fathers
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 13:47:07 GMT

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Free @Backup service! Click here for your free trial of @Backup.
@Backup is the most convenient way to securely protect and access
your files online. Try it now and receive 300 MyPoints.
http://click.egroups.com/1/6348/8/_/61050/_/968248028/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete Omnes!

My warmest congratulations of the three newest Conscript Paters of Nova
Roma.

N. Moravius Vado
M. Marcius Rex
M. Octavius Germanicus

..............it looks good on you!! :) :)

Buona Fortuna Perpetua,
Pompeia Cornelia
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


Subject:	[novaroma] My Sister the Rogator
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 13:56:18 GMT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Gratulor vobis
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:03:56 -0500 (CDT)

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Free @Backup service! Click here for your free trial of @Backup.
@Backup is the most convenient way to securely protect and access
your files online. Try it now and receive 300 MyPoints.
http://click.egroups.com/1/6348/8/_/61050/_/968249007/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

> Congradulations to our newest Senators, the most honorable N. Moravius
> Vado, M. Marcius Rex, and M. Octavius Germanicus. May the goddesses and
> gods of Nova Roma always wish you safe and sound.

Thank you for your well-wishes and congratulations, Gnae Moravi. They are
much appreciated!

The three of us must now await the Censors' approval before this becomes
official.

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma
Microsoft delenda est!
http://www.graveyards.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] New Conscript Fathers
From:	"C Marius Merullus" <c_marius_m@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 11:00:01 -0400

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Special Offer-Earn 300 Points from MyPoints.com for trying @Backup
Get automatic protection and access to your important computer files.
Install today:
http://click.egroups.com/1/6347/8/_/61050/_/968252581/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete Cives

The censores in no way reject the recommendation of the Senate. We have
agreed, however, to review collegially at a later date the candidates
recommended.

Here is my reason for this delay:

i Enlargement of the Senate is extremely important, appointment is for
life. In light of this, it is my firm belief that each pair of censores
should consider one pool of candidates put forward by the Senate, once (in
addition to the automatic inclusion of newly elected consules, censores and
praetores). Again, this is not to say that the censores should reject
candidates put forward by the Senate, nor is there an intention to do so
now.
ii My colleague and I believe that the list of people presented to the
Senate for consideration should be larger.
iii Neither of us considered it sound or appropriate to confuse the
proceedings of the Senate by last-minute requests to expand the list in mid
session.
iv It is my firm belief that the Senate should not be circumvented in
this process, that is, the censores should add only candidates nominated by
the Senate; any item presented for a vote in the Senate is in the purview
of the Consules
v The bottom line: we ask for the patience of everyone while we sort
this out

I am proceeding from interpretation of Lex Vedia Senatoria
(http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/lex99073003.html)
favoring as much order yet inclusivity as possible.

Valete

C Marius Merullus
Censor Suffectus


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: New Conscript Fathers
From:	"Razenna " <razenna@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 15:17:19 -0000


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: [mithras] new book
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 13:48:28 -0400


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Greetings from a newbie.
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 14:11:31 -0400


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Livy on fasces
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 14:27:10 -0400

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/8/_/61050/_/968264040/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

"J. T. Sibley" wrote:

> Piscinus@-------- wrote:
>
> > Salve bene clara Fulvia:
>
> Salve Piscinus!
>
> > My information, a commentary on Livy mentions elm or birch rods were
> > used.
>
> Would be realllly interested in where, exactly, in Livy, this info can be found.
> (lead me to books...hehehe....yes, I *do* want to see this...as I want to get my
> facts straight).
>
> Oak was sacred to Jupiter Quirinus (wielder of the oak staff/spear) (Cook, Arthur
> B. (1905) The European Sky-God. III. The Italians. _Folk-Lore_ _16_: 274-5,
> 279-88) and lictors carried (oak?) wands surrrounding axes, wrapped/bound with red
> strips (_ibid._: 302): "But the best proof that a Roman king was regarded as an
> oak-Jupiter lies in the nature of his regalia. A large gold crown of oak-leaves
> enriched with acorns of precious stones and golden ribands was worn by him
> [Tertullus: de coron. mil. 13; Pliny: nat. hist. 21.6, 33. 11, alib.] as viceroy
> of the oak-god, while an ivory sceptre with an eagle perched on it [Dionys.: ant.
> Rom. 3. 61 f.; see also Folk-Lore 15: 371 f.] proclaimed the human Jupiter [see
> further Class. Rev. xviii. 361 f.]. His throne was hollowed out of a tree stump
> [Lyd.: de mag. 1.7, Serv. in Vergil, Aen. 1. 506, 7.169. See also Classical
> Review 17: 406, 413; Folk-Lore 15: 416]. The fasces borne before him by the
> lictors consisted in each case of an axe bound up in a bundle of rods and fastened
> with a strap of red leather [Daremberg-Saglio Dict. ant. iii. 1239]. It is
> probable that the axe was the symbol for Jupiter [Class. Rev. xviii. 362, 365],
> and that the rods were used for purposes of divination [cf. the custom of the
> ancient Germans described by Tacitus: Germania 10]: both, no doubt, came to be
> regarded as means of punishment, but their primary significance appears to have
> been religious, not secular." This seems to be referring to customs and lore of
> Roman Republic days here, and into the earlier part of the Empire.
>
> It makes much more sense to me being oak rather than another wood, as oak was so
> strongly linked to Jupiter, the wielder of the divine thunderbolt. The axe in the
> fasces was also a symbol of the god (as Jupiter Dolichenus). The red =
> fire/zigzag of lightning/the in-flight (destructive) power of the god.
>
> > Elm was the traditional tree of protection and succor in ancient Rome, and
> > through out Archaic Italy.
>
> How does the elm relate to the axe, then?
> I shall have to look this up! Been a looonnnngg time since I read Orlando
> Furioso. When was that written?
>
> > The magical association of elm as a tree of protection may even be found in
> > Ariosto's Orlando Furioso where Brandimont is saved by an elm branch before she
> > descends into the Cave of Merlin and meets with Vivian.
>
> Protection in general? I cannot remember offhand which god or goddess was related
> with the elm. But grabbing a specific tree branch in order to steady oneself/keep
> from slipping into disaster isn't the same as the association of a specific tree
> branch with rulership. We do, however, see Thor (Norse mythology) grabbing onto a
> rowan branch to haul himself out of a raging river.
>
> > Oak on the other hand is a tree representing power.
>
> The power of the sky-god Jupiter, specifically, and his authority and approval of
> a ruler or ruling system. We can see a related motif in an earlier Greek coin
> (silver drach;m, Larissa, ca. 336 BCE, with a portrait head of Aleuas, the
> legendary "tagos" (leader/despot) of Thessaly, with a small depiction of a double
> axe next to it, as the symbol of the Zeus-approved/acknowledged legitimacy of his
> rule and power. To see this coin, see Jenkins, G.K. (1972) _Ancient Greek
> Coins_, N.Y.: Putnam. p. 121, coin # 272.
>
> > The symbolism of the fasces in ancient Rome was based on an idea of strength
> > through unity, much
> > as it is used in the US Senate today. The oak bundles used as fasces by the
> > Italian Fascists is a later invention, and has a completely different
> > connotation.
>
> Cook, a scholar who *died* before the rise of Mussolini, was a well-regarded
> researcher and folklorist, and specialist on Zeus/Jupiter.
>
> > A pomerium. I have been in a lot of interesting discussions about this
> > subject lately. Attilius Regulus and I have been meeting in the taverna
>
> in vino veritas..... bibo, ergo sum.... ;-)
>
> > to discuss the theory now being posed since the Palatine pomerium wall was
> > recently discovered (12 yrs. ago) and its first public exhibition occurred
> > just this past month. Some others have joined with us on occasion, voicing
> > different opinions. One problem has been the difference in usage of the term
> > between Latinists like Apollonius Formosanus, and those like myself who are
> > oriented more towards archaeology.
>
> Yeah, I tend more toward archaeology, but also on folklore, myth, and legend.
>
> > One view, based primarily on Livy, is that on either side of the city
> > wall there was designated a space in which there was to be no buildings
> > constructed, no tombs laid, and no armed forces allowed to enter. This area
> > was called the pomerium.
>
> Aha. I thought it might have had something to do with storing apples....
>
> > Assembly of the Centuriata, essentially a milita gathering, took place on the
> > Campus Martius because it lay outside the pomerium. With regard to fasces in
> > particular, originally the fasces were
> > used by the kings of Rome.
>
> see my comments above, with the citation from Cook. Would be *really* interested
> in your input. I do recognize that a *lot* of info has come to light since Cook
> published his work.
>
> > Proscribing them to remain outside the city was a way of saying the authority of
> > kings no longer ruled over the people of Rome. Fasces with axheads were carried
> > outside the city walls, most especially with consuls in field commands.
>
> Reference? (I am revising a manuscript (scholarly book) on the divine
> thunderbolt, have a section on the Roman period, want to get things *right*.
>
> > As I understand, there were different categories of lictors. Three decuri
> > ae of lictors were used for magistrates. An additional decuria of lictores
> > curiati were assigned to public sacrifices, the Flamen Dialis, and to the
> > Vestals. A Vestal who traveled in public was always escorted by one lictor,
> > and even Consuls were by tradition to yield to them. Anyone escorted by a
> > Vestal was also under her protection, free from assault or seizure. No
> > magistrate had authority to breach such a sanctuary given by a Vestal.
>
> And the Vestals tended the sacred flame, the "divine flame-on-earth" (ie the
> living flame of the divine thunderbolt of Jupiter)
>
> > I hope I have answered all your questions. Pleased do contact me again if
> > I may be of any further assistance.
>
> No problem, here I am! I think we can have us a really *nice* juicy conversation
> here!
>
> > Dei dique te bene ament. Si vales, valeo.
>
> I hope I got that right; been a loooonnnnngggg time since I studied Latin!
>
> fulvia


Subject:	[novaroma] Conscript Fathers
From:	Piscinus@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:38:09 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] Conscript Fathers
From:	"C Marius Merullus" <c_marius_m@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 16:45:26 -0400

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
of 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Ongoing APR* and no annual fee!
Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9146/8/_/61050/_/968273305/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete Cn Moravi et alii

Let me begin by thanking you for this opportunity to answer some questions
about my actions. If anyone is bored by quotes of laws and interpretation
of them, please delete this.

>
> The Constitution (IV. A.1.d) states that Censors are to maintain the
Album
> Senatorium *including the power to add and remove names on that list
>according to qualifications set by law.* The provision *to maintain* is
not
>an honor or a power under the Constitution, rather it is an *obligation*
set
>by IV.A.1.

I have neither said nor done anything in conflict with the above. Rather,
my colleague and I are doing our best to comply with the law in the most
orderly way that we see possible. We recognize our obligations and shall
fulfill them.

>
2. *At the discretion of
>the Censors* an elected curule aedile, or an appointed provincial governor
>may be entered. The three conscript Fathers could have met this
>qualification without any Senatus Consultum had the censors acted on it
>first. 3. Then there are those nominated by a Senatus Consultum. This
>provision also goes on to say *the censors may, at their discretion,
include
>that individual in the album Senatorium.* Whereas the lex does state, as
you
>point out, that the Senate only nominates, and that the censors then are to
>enter the conscript fathers names into the Album Senatorium, it does not
>provide exactly how the nominated are elected, as in case 1.

Right, it leaves some room for interpretation. My interpretation is that
the censores should review those people nominated by the Senate, period. I
want to have a pool of all people that qualify under the law for inclusion,
then review every person in the pool with my colleague.

One would
>naturally have to assume that since there are three provisions in the Lex
>Vedia Senatoria, distinguishing three types of procedures for elevating
cives
>to Senatorial rank, that there must be three different authorities enacted
>with such powers.

Or, there are three different paths to appointment to the Senate. In the
case of paths 2 & 3, the censores have discretion in adding the person to
the Senate. This to me is a major power of the office of censor, that needs
to be limited and defined by precedent.
>
> It would seem that you and the censor Sulla have interpreted these
>provisions as providing the censors with certain powers not so stipulated
in
>the Constitution.

I disagree.

Where as the Constitution states (I.A) that the Constitutio
>n itself shall be the basic authority, and that (I.B) the Constitution
shall
>be the highest authority within Nova Roma and that it *shall thereafter be
>followed in legal authority* by edicta of consuls, by leges passed by any
>comitia, by decreta of the Collegium Pontificum, decreta by the Collegium
>Augurium, Senatus Consultum and every magisterial edicta, and further that
>when a conflict in authority does take place that *the higher authority
shall
>take precedence,* then how is it that this mere Lex Vedia Senatoria is
being
>held in some way as a higher authority than the Constitution?

It isn't.

Where is the
>provision that equates an obligation to perform one's duty to some assumed
>power to withhold approval of an action taken by the Senate?

The key phrase here is "discretion of the Censors". The two people in
office currently are L Cornelius Sulla Felix and C Marius Merullus. We want
to proceed in compliance with the law but have more people put forward than
were included in the recently passed Senatus consultum. If you have some
patience with us, I see no reason to expect that you will find any violation
or offense in the result.

By what you
>suggest, since entry into the Album Senatorium requires both censors under
>the Lex Vedia Senatoria, only one censor could theoretically prohibit an
>individual from being elevated into the Senate.

That would be a correct interpretation in my view.

Is Nova Roma's governance to
>be held hostage by one individual acting out of vindictiveness and malice?

I see no evidence of one individual acting out of vindictiveness and malice.

>Are you also suggesting that it would then require the Senate to pass a
Senatu
>s conultum ultimum to overrule that action of one individual, compelling
the
>consuls to take action in place of the censors because one failed to
fulfill
>his obligations?

No, I am not suggesting that.

Are you suggesting the potential of a constitutional crisis
>is possible due to some rather spurious interpretation of the provisions of
>the Constitution?

No.
>
> If that is the case then what body is to rule when there becomes a
>conflict of interpretation, as to whether or not a question is
>constitutional?

This is an excellent question. We do not have a constitutional court;
rather, magistrates in office interpret the law and apply it, within the
confines of a system of collegial magistracies that in itself provides
checks and balances.

What body rules on whether a magisterial edictum is
>constitutional or not?

The set of all magistrates with power of intercessio over any given edictum.
Tribuni Plebis, for example, have the power "To collegially pronounce
intercessio against the actions of any other magistrate (with the exception
of the dictator and the interrex), Senatus consulta, and laws passed by the
comitia when they feel that the spirit and letter of this Constitution are
being violated thereby"

Where is the provision to enforce the Constitution as
>the *highest legal authority*?

Foremost in my priorities. If the Tribuni Plebis veto my action here, which
is to delay considering entering into the album senatorium the names of
these people just approved for inclusion into the Senate, then I shall
proceed immediately to consider them for inclusion. Of course, my colleague
would also have to submit to the tribunician veto in order for us to
proceed, and I believe that he would.

How are the arbitrary actions of any
>magistrate or provincial propraetor really to be dealt with?

If you believe the action of a magistrate to be unacceptable, you have many
options. I can identify the following:

- Write to the magistrate and his/her colleague with your reasoning, why
you believe that he/she is acting improperly
- Write to other magistrates with power of intercessio, where applicable,
to petition them to veto what you consider to be an arbitrary edictum
- Appeal to public opinion by voicing your concerns, an option that you
are now exercising with at least some effect, in that you are forcing me to
consider your questions and answer them
- Voting for magistrates that act rightly in your view, and not for those
who act arbitrarily in your view
- Ultimately, run for office so that you can be directly involved in
government

You probably have other options as well.

Is the only practical solution allowed in Nova Roma to
>either invest the consuls with absolute powers or to appoint a dictator?
Is
>there to be no rule of law in Nova Roma then?

Why, Cnae Moravi, I am working toward rule of law in Nova Roma.
>
> Clarissimi viri, there is such a thing as carrying tradition a little
too
>far. Lack of consideration of the consequences of ill defined
constitutional
>provisions for a modern organization I would regard as such an instance.

You know, the Nova Roman constitution is still only about a year old. The
law and offices, all of it, are still being defined. The two censores
elected into office are trying to go about this obligation in a manner that
will hopefully serve to limit our power, not broaden it. The power is
already there ("discretion"); why not have one pool of nominees, as large
as possible under the qualifications of the law, over which the censores are
obligated to exercise this discretion?

Valete

C Marius Merullus
Censor Suffectus


Subject:	[novaroma] Ad congratulatores
From:	RexMarcius@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 16:57:19 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Conscript Fathers
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 10:46:56 -0700

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
of 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Ongoing APR* and no annual fee!
Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9146/8/_/61050/_/968274187/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Piscinus@-------- wrote:

>
> Gn. Moravius Piscinus SPD CV C. Mario Merullo SEN:
>
> Perhaps the good Censor would care to clarify this a little more.
>
> The Constitution (IV. A.1.d) states that Censors are to maintain the Album
> Senatorium *including the power to add and remove names on that list
> according to qualifications set by law.* The provision *to maintain* is not
> an honor or a power under the Constitution, rather it is an *obligation* set
> by IV.A.1. The guideline for fulfilling that obligation is set by the rest
> of the provision: *qualifications set by law.*
>
> The particular law relevant here Lex Vedia Senatoria makes provisions for
> three different types of *qualifications set by law* to be possible. 1.Those
> individuals elected in the Centuriata as Censors, Consuls, and Praetors shall
> automatically be included in the Album Senatorium. 2. *At the discretion of
> the Censors* an elected curule aedile, or an appointed provincial governor
> may be entered. The three conscript Fathers could have met this
> qualification without any Senatus Consultum had the censors acted on it
> first. 3. Then there are those nominated by a Senatus Consultum. This
> provision also goes on to say *the censors may, at their discretion, include
> that individual in the album Senatorium.* Whereas the lex does state, as you
> point out, that the Senate only nominates, and that the censors then are to
> enter the conscript fathers names into the Album Senatorium, it does not
> provide exactly how the nominated are elected, as in case 1. But of course
> those elevated under case 3. are not elected in any comitia, as no where else
> is mention made of such a provision for the election of Senators. One would
> naturally have to assume that since there are three provisions in the Lex
> Vedia Senatoria, distinguishing three types of procedures for elevating cives
> to Senatorial rank, that there must be three different authorities enacted
> with such powers. Under provision 1. the authority is the Comitia
> Centuriata; under provision 2. the censors; and then under provision 3. it is
> the Senate itself. The *qualifications set by law* in that case would come
> under the Constitutional provision of V.F and the Senatus Consultum de
> Ratione Senatus which established the procedures to be used within the Senate
> itself.
>

Ave, here is the relevant law. Under the Lex Vedia, "II. Any individual elected
to the office of curule aedile or appointed to the office of provincial governor
may, at the discretion of the censors, be included in the album Senatorum six
months after assuming office (assuming that the individual was not already a
member of the Senate)." Now, the key here is the discretion of the Censors. The
Censors are the individuals who add and remove Senators from the Album. Therefore
the recommendation from the Senate as to who they recommend is just that. A
recommendation. Both Censors abstained from that vote, and I can tell you only
why I abstained. First, the Censors were not consulted as to that list.
Secondly, since this has been a discussion between Merullus and myself we both
agreed we would not voice our opinions in the Senate in regard to this matter til
we both agreed on who, or if we were going to add Senators. Finally, we believe
that there were people who should have been on that list but, when we discoverd in
the Senate who was on that list we felt that we should abstain since the Vote
didnt included other Citizens. As a result, I abstained and so did my colleague.

>
> It would seem that you and the censor Sulla have interpreted these
> provisions as providing the censors with certain powers not so stipulated in
> the Constitution. Where as the Constitution states (I.A) that the Constitutio
> n itself shall be the basic authority, and that (I.B) the Constitution shall
> be the highest authority within Nova Roma and that it *shall thereafter be
> followed in legal authority* by edicta of consuls, by leges passed by any
> comitia, by decreta of the Collegium Pontificum, decreta by the Collegium
> Augurium, Senatus Consultum and every magisterial edicta, and further that
> when a conflict in authority does take place that *the higher authority shall
> take precedence,* then how is it that this mere Lex Vedia Senatoria is being
> held in some way as a higher authority than the Constitution? Where is the
> provision that equates an obligation to perform one's duty to some assumed
> power to withhold approval of an action taken by the Senate? By what you
> suggest, since entry into the Album Senatorium requires both censors under
> the Lex Vedia Senatoria, only one censor could theoretically prohibit an
> individual from being elevated into the Senate. Is Nova Roma's governance to
> be held hostage by one individual acting out of vindictiveness and malice?

Actually, in my opinion, the word maintain is further defined by the Lex Vedia.
The Lex Vedia clarifies the roles of the Censors in this matter. As stated in the
Websters Dictionary, "to keep in and existing state." Also, "to uphold and defend
a current position" and "to continue or preserve in." So, while the Constitution
provides the broad brush strokes, the Lex Vedia clarifies for the Censors exactly
how we do our duty.

As for your final part on this. Just who are you referring too Gnaeus Moravius?

>
> Are you also suggesting that it would then require the Senate to pass a Senatu
> s conultum ultimum to overrule that action of one individual, compelling the
> consuls to take action in place of the censors because one failed to fulfill
> his obligations? Are you suggesting the potential of a constitutional crisis
> is possible due to some rather spurious interpretation of the provisions of
> the Constitution?
>

Both Censors are acting Constitutional, we are both communicating on this matter.
For you to suggest otherwise is interesting. Just what are you trying to say?
Are you grandstanding to the People to gather potential votes? Or are you just
acting as a demogague? Or are you suggestiong that you are going to create a
Constitutional Crises if you dont get your way? I see, if you dont get your way,
you are going to create a Constitutional Crises.

>
> If that is the case then what body is to rule when there becomes a
> conflict of interpretation, as to whether or not a question is
> constitutional?

I think this would be a question for our Praetors? Dont you?

> What body rules on whether a magisterial edictum is
> constitutional or not?

Well, I think you might need to read the Constitution, becuase it states it quite
clearly there.

> Where is the provision to enforce the Constitution as
> the *highest legal authority*?

Again, I think you need to read the Constitution.

> How are the arbitrary actions of any
> magistrate or provincial propraetor really to be dealt with?

I have a question for you, first off how do you determine what are and are not
arbitrary actions?

> A series of
> edicta and intercessi? And when it reaches the highest magistrate(s) and
> still conflicts with the Constitution, what practical provision is there to
> resolve the problem?

What exactly are you referring too? No one has a conflict with the Constitution.
And, for example if I am seeking clarification in regards to the Constitution I
refer to the Praetors who interprete the Consitution, as cited in (IV, A, 3, b)
under the terms administer the law.

> Is the only practical solution allowed in Nova Roma to
> either invest the consuls with absolute powers or to appoint a dictator? Is
> there to be no rule of law in Nova Roma then?
>

I believe there is consistent rule of law in Nova Roma. We have proven that by
our transition of power from Consuls to Consul and by fostering this stable
government since our Noble Dictator Flavius Vedius Germancius.

>
> Clarissimi viri, there is such a thing as carrying tradition a little too
> far. Lack of consideration of the consequences of ill defined constitutional
> provisions for a modern organization I would regard as such an instance.

Its interesting you say that. I think tradition is one of the foundation blocks
of Nova Roma. Just as it was in ancient Rome. Consider exactly what we are
doing. We are trying to rebuild a society and government that has ceased to exist
for almost 1500 to 2000 years (depending on if you are an Imperialist or a
Republican). Ancient Rome followed tradition just as much as they followed laws.
And, when we dont have laws to dictate our action one of our ways to interpret our
actions is to view tradition. Even in legal theory, using the intent of the
Fathers (in American Law) is a mode of interpretation of the law. (American
Constitutional Law, 10ed). Therefor I do disagree with you.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: [Egressus] New Semester and idea
From:	JOANNE SHAVER <merlinia@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 17:39:50 -0400


Subject:	[novaroma] Nova Roma student chapters
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Sep 2000 21:52:36 -0000


Subject:	[novaroma] A bit premature
From:	DTibbe2926@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 18:51:23 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Fascist Rome
From:	"Nick Ford" <gens_moravia@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 23:35:29 +0100