Forum Romanum


Subject:	[novaroma] New Sacerdos Isis of Nova Roma!
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 22:14:00 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] New Sacerdos Isis of Nova Roma!
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 19:15:19 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] New Priest of Isis
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 22:15:45 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] New Priest of Isis
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 19:17:34 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] New Priesthood appointment: Quindecimviri Sacris Faciundis
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 22:26:12 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] New Priesthood appointment: Quindecimviri Sacris Faciundis
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 19:27:20 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] New Sacerdos Magnae Matris
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 23:03:10 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] New Sacerdos Magnae Matris
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:09:36 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] Sibylline Books
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Sep 2000 21:00:08 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] Could use some more advice...
From:	"Raven Leigh" <qeshet@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 04:27:35 GMT


Subject:	[novaroma] Story finished! {sort of}
From:	Lykaion1@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 00:27:41 EDT

-------------------------- 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/_/968300869/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

After a lot of thought, I have decided to shelve the novel. One reason
is I just don't have the time to finish it, and it is taking a lot longer
than I thought it would. The other reason is embarrassing: I made a mess of
it. I really don't want to do yet another revision of chapters already done,
but it needed much more work than I have time for. And novels should be left
to skilled writers.

Some people have emailed and asked what happens next. So, here is a
detailed synopsis of the entire story, picking up where it left off. The
last chapter ended the party at Sulla's, and Gaius went home to a fitful
sleep, culminating in his seeing the apparition of the long dead Arsinoe.

The next day sees Cassius, Draco and Gaius in the office of the new
Procurator of Judea, Porcius Festus, on the first day of his administration.
Gaius is introduced to Porcius Festus, who tells him that because he {Gaius}
has lived in Judea for over a decade, his insights and advice to the
Procurator would be appreciated. Gaius accepts Festus' invitation to be an
unofficial advisor and listening ear.
Tribune Flavius Germanicus briefs Porcius Festus of the current state of
the province. The situation is near critical. With the recent massacre in
the Jewish section of Caesarea, under the previous procurator, the worthless
Felix, the province has lost confidence in Roman justice, and the tension
threatens to break out in revolt. Germanicus warns that Rome's arch-enemy,
Parthia, is just to the east, and that a revolt in Judea could be exploited
by Parthia. Were this to happen, Parthia could gain control of Judea and
from there threaten both the Roman provinces in Asia Minor and Egypt, as well
as have a coast line with port cities, thus threatening Roman shipping.
Porcius Festus announces his intention to begin his administration with
a show of clemency; all those arrested by Felix during the riot will be
released. Cassius then tells Festus that one legal matter is of special
interest, and is relevant to the problems of the province. A Jew called Saul
Paulus of Tarsus, had been detained two years before in Jerusalem. Saul
Paulus is a leader of the Christian sect, and was rescued from an angry
Jewish crowd in Jerusalem by auxiliary troops from the Fortress Antonia,
which stands next to the Jewish Temple. The Jewish leaders had accused
Paulus before Felix of desecrating the temple and violating Jewish law.
Felix had left Paul in prison, even though no actual charges of sedition
against Rome had been made against him. Cassius explains his interest in the
case. This Paul worships Jesus of Nazareth, who was exectuted for sedition
under the Prefect Pilate about 30 years before, yet neither Paul nor the
Christians have been accused of sedition themselves, nor do they seem to have
any political objectives. Cassius thinks it odd that the sect based on an
alleged revolutionary would be devoid of political aspirations itself. What
is more, this Paul is a Roman citizen as well! The Jewish authorities in
Jerusalem still wish Paul to be tried for sacrilige. Porcius Festus, as a
Roman Procurator, is not concerned with matters of Jewish religious law, but
only with Roman Law, and there is no evidence Paul broke Roman law. Cassius
points out the dilemma: If Paul is released, it may further exasperate the
current tensions with the Jews of Judea. On the other hand, Festus' sense of
Roman justice prohibits him from handing over a fellow Roman citizen to
certain condemnation by the Priests in Jerusalem. Cassius suggests that
somehow Festus must shift the responsibility to a higher authority outside of
Judea, and to get Paul out of the province. Out of sight, out of mind! But
how to do this is the question.
Cassius also suggests that Rome will need to eventually formulate policy on
this new sect. He had found in the archives in Caesarea a copy of Pilate's
dispatch to Rome in which the exectution of Jesus is given a small mention.
Was Jesus really a seditionist? Would not Pilate have had informers keeping
an eye on Jesus actions and reporting his speeches to Pilate? Most
definitely, but none of these records survives in Caesarea. Gaius Lupinius
suggests that perhaps they may still exist in the vaults of the Fortress
Antonia in Jerusalem. Hoping to discover the evidence which would help Rome
to decide it's Christian policy, Festus and Draco are asked to go to
Jerusalem to see what they can find out.

Gaius Lupinius arrives home to prepare to journey to Jerusalem with
Draco, to find that Julia Isadora is waiting to see him. The young
prostitute Lauria Crispa is out of money and out of home. Her roommate, the
dominatrix, had absconded out of town and had moved on, taking their joint
monies with her, leaving Lauria with no rent. Gaius gives Julia money for
Lauria, and then asks Julia to have Lauria move in with her while he is away
in Jerusalem. He decides it is time to do what he should have done already:
Get Lauria out of prostitution, and adopt her as his own daughter. That way,
he could see she was well taken care of, and arrange a good marriage and
family life for her one day. He asks Julia to ask Lauria for him, if she
would be his daughter. She agrees, and Gaius writes a new will and a
certificate of adoption for Lauria. He intends to record them with the local
government as soon as he returns.

The trip to Jerusalem yeilds little information. Gaius discovers in the
Antonia correspondence office a box marked as the files on Jesus of Nazareth,
but all the box contains is another copy of Pilate's dispatch to Rome, and a
note from the then-High Priest Caiaphas to Pilate, requesting a meeting.
Draco, meanwhile, interviews the aged Caiaphas. Caiaphas explains in what
sense Jesus was a blasphemer in the Jewish law, and maintains that Jesus was
in fact a political revolutionary. He explains this was the paramount reason
for turning Jesus over to the Roman authorities. But with no records of the
trial, and no intelligence reports from informers, Draco and Gaius return to
Caesarea with nothing substantial to report.

Back in Caesarea, they are told of the sudden death of Sulla, who died
while having a bowel movement. It appears to them that Sulla's lifestyle had
taken it's toll. No one suspects that it was poison adminstered by his
charge, the disgusting little pervert Sporus.

Cassius recieves a note requesting he meet an old gentleman at the
wooden hippodrome outside the city. Intrigued, he goes, and there he meets
Marcus Minucius Audens, an old retired soldier. In his younger days, Audens
had served under Pontius Pilate as chief of local intelligence, and it is
through his old connections that he learned of the unofficial investigation
into the case of Jesus of Nazareth. Audens tells Cassius a fascinating
story. It is his account of the events leading up to Jesus' crucifixion.
Audens, as intelligence chief, had as one of his routine duties the
surveillance of local popular preachers. He had infiltrated the Jesus
movement through Jewish agents who reported to him the words and teachings of
Jesus. Jesus, Audens tells Cassius, was politically harmless by himself,
though there were elements who would have liked to see Jesus take a political
road. But one of Audens' agents, a Jew called Judah Ish Kerioth {Judas
Iscariot} was a double agent, working for both the Temple authories and the
Romans. It was Judas who had arranged for the Temple Guard to arrest Jesus
late one night before the Passover. After Jesus had been arrested, he was
handed over to Pilate for judegment on the charge of sedition. Both Audens
and Pilate knew that the sedition charge was bogus. But Pilate had several
times already in his administration gave the Jews reasons for grievance, and
in all cases they complained to Rome, and Rome had taken their side and
reprimanded Pilate. Pilate was not anxious to give them another cause for
complaint. He had sentenced Jesus to die for sedition, downplayed the
significance of the event in his official report, and presumably it was
Pilate who had the records destroyed.
Cassius asks Audens if he would agree to write and sign a statement
testifying to these events. Audens hesitates, but in the end, he agrees.
Cassius now feels their inquiry has paid off, and Porcius Festus writes a
report on the christian sect for the Emperor, including the signed statement
of Audens. Cassius includes a note of his own, recommending his judgement
that the christians pose no political or seditious threat, and shoud Rome
ever need to make policy on the sect, it should be one of toleration
comparable to the toleration shown in Rome's Jewish policy.

At home, Gaius Lupinius feels quite different than he did a few days
before. The trip to Jerusalem and his decision to adopt Lauria has given him
a peace of mind he had not had in years. Perhaps, he thinks, the only way to
have peace from the events of the past, and to lay Arsinoe's spirit to rest
is to go back to Rome, face the reality of what happened years before, and
resume his old life with his soon-to-be daughter, Lauria. He could not save
Arsinoe, but he could save her.

Lauria knew she would be banned from the tavern and brothel where she
used to work. It had been inherited by Sporus, and he hated her for Gaius'
humiliation of him. But she realizes that she had left her precious
alabaster vial of ointment in a hiding place in her room there. Knowing the
risk, she goes to the tavern early in the day, before it opens. Sneaking in
through a window, she retrieves her ointment, but hides when she hears Sporus
enter the building. Three men, Jews or Syrians by their dress, are with him.
Lauria listens in on their conversation. The men are Sicarii, fanatical
assasins and patriots for a free Israel. Sporus persuades them to accept a
generous payment for the killing of Gaius Lupinius Festus. The leader of the
Sicarii, a man named Eleazar, hesitates, but accepts the offer. The deal is
made, and Sporus is delighted to have his revenge on Gaius.
When the men leave, and Sporus goes into the wine cellar, Lauria exits
by the same window she came in. She is frantic. Somehow, she must find
Gaius and warn him. She goes to his house, and to Julia's house, but he is
not there. Terrified, she begins searching the city for her friend.

Gaius takes out his old toga, now in need of mending, and goes in the
evening to the office of Porcius Festus, where Cassius and his wife and
sister, Justinia, are having a last evening with Porcius Festus before
setting off for home. Gaius announces he is going to come back with them to
Rome when they leave in two days. Cassius is overjoyed, and Gaius asks
Justinia if she could mend his toga for him. It is his way of trying to
apologize. Justinia hugs him and says yes. She too apologizes for their
last encounter. As they talk, she asks Gaius how he feels about going back.
He confesses he is a bit scared. Justinia tries to comfort his feelings.
She says the Cassii will always be there for him. Gaius still has to
finalize his adoption of Lauria, and since it is late, he borrows a torch,
and sets off for home.

He is walking back to his home when the Sicarii strike. Lauria arrives,
tries to scream a warning, and then tries to intervene to stop the attack.
She is stabbed by one of the Sicarii, and falls. Gaius tries to fend off his
attackers with the torch, but there are three of them, and he quickly falls
under their blades, and dies in the narrow street. Lauria, badly hurt and in
pain, crawls over to him, crying for him to get up. Eleazar kneels beside
her. He is distressed. This was not part of the plan. He asks her name.
Lauria looks up at him and answers, "Lupinia". Eleazar has no wish for a
young girl to die. But she is a witness, and must know about Sporus and the
deal they made. He draws his knife, and quickly slits her throat.

Julia and Porcius Festus are at the dock to see Cassius and his family
off on their voyage back to Rome. Cassius is shattered by the sudden death
of his old friend, as is Julia, who also grieves for Lauria, who was not
granted happiness in her short life. Festus agrees to see that Gaius' will
is executed. They suspect Sporus is involved, but with no witnesses, little
can be done. Julia asks Cassius who Arsinoe was, and what happened years ago
to her and Gaius. Cassius hestitates to say, but sine all involved are now
dead, he tells her. He tells that Arsinoe and Gaius were out together when
Arsinoe was taken to the pallace, summoned by the emperor Caligula. Julia
shudders at the horror of how Caligula raped her, then turned her over to his
friends for their turn. This torture went on, and as a joke, they made 15
year old Gaius watch her being violated and injured, until she died. Gaius
Lupinius never got over that night. After threatening him with death should
he talk about it, they dumped him and Arsinoe's body in the park. Gaius did
the only thing he could do. He ran to Cassius house and told the elder
Cassius everything. The old man and his servants left to retreive the body.
The official story was that her murderer was unknown, and that Gaius had
found the body.
Since that night, Gaius began to deteriorate, haunted by what he thought was
her spirit, angry that he was not able to save her. "Was Gaius mad, then?",
Julia asked. Cassius answered yes.
They said their goodbyes, and as they are about to board the ship, a
hawk soars overhead, circles the ship, and flies off south. Julia, a
priestess of Isis, looks at Patricia and tells her a prophecy. She tells her
that one day she will "walk in the footsteps of Isis, and with Anubis and
Thoth, there find refuge".

As their ship began to glide out of the harbor of Caesarea, Cassius
holds his wife Patricia close to him. He begins to worry about her, having
seen how tragedy once again came so quickly. Patricia points to a pair of
birds in flight, and sees it as an omen. She says they will be together
forever, and if they are parted, it would be only fot a brief time. They
turn away from the city, and look ahead at the sea, towards Rome.

This was the ending of Part One. Part Two is about what happens to Cassius
and the others in Rome several yeards later. I will post that synopsis when
I am back online late in September.

Gaius Lupinius Festus


Subject:	[novaroma] Absence
From:	Lykaion1@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 00:27:45 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] Congratulations
From:	Caius Flavius Diocletianus <3s@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:38:33 +0200


Subject:	[novaroma] Congratulations, 2nd part
From:	Caius Flavius Diocletianus <3s@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:42:38 +0200


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Sibylline Books
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:53:37 +0100

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Tired of searching for an apartment? Try Viva! It's fast and free.
Now serving Dallas, Houston, Austin, Phoenix, Denver and Las Vegas.
Rent by September 30th - get $100 cash!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9154/8/_/61050/_/968320765/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salve Sulla

>Given this recent appointment I have a question. Since I do find this
>subject interesting. But, when and if the books will be completed....will
>they be available for citizens to examine or would this just be a
>religious/Senatorial access?
>Also, what exactly will they be about?
The Sibylline Books were burned by Stillico in the first years of the 5th
century AD. The surviving Sibylline Books were written by Jews and
Christians as a means of anti-pagan propaganda. Nevertheless, the oldest of
these books, which belong to the Jewish collection (books 3, 4 and 5)
include patches of pagan oracles. Some of these are likely to belong to the
Erithrean collection, the same to which the original Roman Sibylline Books
belonged (the legend says that the Erithrean Sybil went to Cumae, being the
same that provided the Books to king Tarquin). Moreover, there are 2 other
oracles recorded.
The task of the Quindecemviri is then to recover the patches likely to
belong to the Erithrean collection and form a new set of oracles. I'm
confident on the capabilities of our new Quindecemvir, who is an successful
student used to the preactice of historical research.

I think that the new collection of oracles will be secret and known only by
the Quindecemviri and (eventually) the Pontifex Maximus, but this is a
decision that the Collegium Pontificum will make. The Sibylline Books are to
be used in extreme situations, being consulted by order from the Senate.

Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus


Subject:	[novaroma] Gratulor vobis
From:	Piscinus@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 06:39:54 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] New book
From:	DTibbe2926@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 08:39:38 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] the Conscript Fathers
From:	Razenna <razenna@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 05:40:46 -0700


Subject:	[novaroma] Congratulations
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 10:16:11 US/Central


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Conscript Fathers
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 17:08:06 GMT

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Tired of searching for an apartment? Try Viva! It's fast and free.
Now serving Dallas, Houston, Austin, Phoenix, Denver and Las Vegas.
Rent by September 30th - get $100 cash!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9154/8/_/61050/_/968346488/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salutem!

In the light of the recent exchange between my son Cn. Moravius Piscinus and
our two Censors on the laws governing appointment and admission to the
Senate, I would like to take this opportunity to ask him to make it clear
that he is not accusing either Censor of contemplating non-appointment of a
nominee to the Senate out of personal malice, but that he is simply stating
that such a risk might exist in future if the Constitution were to be
interpreted as he suggests.

I myself am satisfied, since the highly regrettable occasion when I
challenged L. Cornelius' integrity as Censor publicly, that such accusations
are inappropriate, since they were considered groundless by everyone else
who replied on the Main List at the time. It occurs to me now that I never
made apology for having made such accusations without irrefutable proof, and
I think it is to Sulla's credit that he never demanded an apology from me at
all. I offer it to him now.

So, son - if you saw your way cleaer to express regret to both L. Cornelius
and C. Marius for any unintended insult, it would please your father and
many others, too, I think.

Avete,

Vado (who is not at all worried about being a possible object of personal
malice).

_________________________________________________________________________
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] Re: Sybilline Books
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 17:18:18 GMT


Subject:	[novaroma] Constitutional questions
From:	Piscinus@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:21:05 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/_/968347272/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete Quiribus

Sulla Scripsit:
>>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. >>

Respondo:
First, you have only reemphasized the point I had made in my earlier
post. The censor's duty to enter names in albums does not equate with any
power allowing them to withhold approval. If you look in the Album Civis and
notice that a citizen of voting age has not been assigned to a tribe or
century does that mean the censor has withheld that citizen's right to vote?
After all, Lex Vedia Centuriata, Sect II.A stipulates that "new citizens
shall be entered into their respective centuries as they join." But by not
assigning a new citizen to a century upon entry the censor would not only be
negligent in their duty, by what you claim, he would also be usurping a power
he does not possess under the Constitution. Would not such a usurpation of
authority need to come under judicial review as to the constitutionality of
such an improper action?
The part of the Lex Vedia Senatoria you quote is section II. This is a
section, meo animo, that requires some reconsideration. What it allows is
for two individuals, as censors, to stack the Senate with their own
candidates, without recourse to any other authority. This is an extremely
dangerous aspect to Lex Vedia Senatorium which should have been reviewed
against the Constitutional provisions.
As I point out in my first post, the Lex Vedia Senatorium provides three
ways for cives to be elevated to the Senate. By election in the Comitia
Centuriata, by the Censors, and by the Senate itself. The section of concern
here is section III. It is not just a recommendation, it is a *nomination*
which implies some election. In the context of the Lex that election takes
place in the Senate as this provision is precisely for the Senate to elevate
cives into its own body. What you are suggesting converts a censor's duty to
serve the state to a power to over rule it.

Sulla scripsit:
>>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.>>

Respondo:
Everything you have quoted here pertains to the censors' obligation to
perform a duty. Doing one's duty is NOT the same as having a power bestowed
on you. Maintain=to keep=to coninue=to preserve. Where does it say here
that you as censor have the power to over rule the Senate and the people?
I agree the Lex Vedia Senatorium, Sect. III refers to the DUTY you are to
perform, but it does not grant you a power to exercise. You seem unable to
distinguish the difference.

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

Respondo:
Too? As in more than one? No, I think it has already been shown that it
would require only one individual usurping powers and authority through
misinterpretation of the constitution to cause a governmental impasse

Sulla Scripsit:
>>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.

Respond:
No, you are not acting in a constitutional manner when you assume a power
you do not have, nor is it constitutional when you act under an edictum, or
even a lex that conflicts with the Constitution.
Do I have an ability at creating a constitutional crisis? Does it so
frighten you that a lone civis who does not hold any government office should
being asking questions? Where do you find the potential danger of a
constitutional crisis?
Interesting you should use the word demagogue. When a citizen begins to ask
questions, points out potential problems and concerns, you refer to them as a
demagogue? And if a citizen asserts his or her other rights what do you call
them?

Moravius scripsit:
>>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?
Sulla scripsit:
>>I think this would be a question for our Praetors? Dont you?
Moravius scripsit:
>>What body rules on whether a magisterial edictum is constitutional or not?
Sulla scripsit:
>>Well, I think you might need to read the Constitution, becuase it states it
quite clearly there
Moravius scripsit:
>> Where is the provision to enforce the Constitution as the *highest legal
authority*?
Sulla scripsit:
>>Again, I think you need to read the Constitution.

Respondo:
I think it is you, Sulla, who needs to read the Constitution. Praetors
do not have it in their purview that (Sect. I.A) "all leges (laws) passed by
the comitia, decreta (decrees) of the priestly collegia, magisterial edicta
(edicts) and Senatus consulta" should be subject to their judicial review.
My question still stands unanswered. To ensure the provision (I.B) by which
the Constitution is made *the highest legal authority within Nova Roma*, what
body has the responsibility of judicial review?
If there wasn't such a provision, or if there is not a comitia or other
panel to enforce it, then any fool who could attained office could start
issuing a whole series of edicts contrary to the Constitution, and in the
name of Nova Roma. What I pointed out in my previous post is that if we had
to rely on other magistrates attempting to veto them, and then move back and
forth in a continuous sequence of edicta and intercessi, this would cause a
disruption of efficient governance There is the true potential of a
Constitutional crises, Sulla. There is the true threat of future
demagoguery; not by a citizen exercising his rights, but by a magistrate
usurping authority through a misinterpretation of the Constitution.
I would also suggest that whatever body we elect to have empowered with
such a responsibility of judicial review also be consulted before submitting
a lex or edictum. First to give it a constitutional review, and secondly to
ensure that the wording is clear. Make that part of the legislative
precedents to avoid judicial review as much as possible.

Moravius scripsit:
>>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?
Sulla scripsit
>>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

Respondo:
Praetors do not have the power of judicial review of constitutional
questions. What Sect. IV.A.3.b refers to in administering law does not extend
their purview to interpret the law beyond that of any other magistrate.
Although you might ask their advise, or that of anyone else, they do not have
constitutional authority to rule on the any measure's constitutionality.
Also Praetors do not have authority to over rule a higher magistrate, nor the
right of intercesso over actions of any comitiae, the Senate or Collegium
Pontifici. Read the Constitution.

Moravius scripsit:
>>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?
Sulla scripsit:
>>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.

Respondo:
That is only your opinion. The Archives tell a very different story.
Having an attempted coup does not bespeak a stable government. Resorting to
a dictator to restore order out of a constitutional crisis does not display a
stable government. The appointment of magistrates by a dictator is not a
smooth transition fostering a stable government. All that has happened thus
far is one election since the dictator handed down the Constitution. There
are still a few things to be worked out here before you can claim Nova Roma
is a stable government.
The only point I have been making is that all of us, omnis cives Novae
Romae, should be looking at how the government is structured under this
Constitution. Do you find such a discussion by free citizens on how they are
to be governed a form of demagoguery?

Moravius scripsit:
>>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.
Sulla scripsit:
>>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.

Respondo:
Yes, consider exactly what you are saying here. Government institutions
are defined by the society they serve. It is not the other way around. If
you think that one individual, be he Dictator or a Dungeon Master, handing
down some outline forms a society you are gravely mistaken. We are an
international community of free citizens brought together through modern
technology. Reference to American Constitutional law is rather meaningless
here, first because it does not have to do with ancient Rome, and secondly
because we are an international organization. On the other hand, since Nova
Roma was incorporated in NH, you might want to have the bylaws reviewed
against American corporate laws, which may significantly revise the
Constitution.
If you think you are trying to revive ancient society then consider
exactly what you are saying. Are you suggesting as Festus did that women
should have their rights revokes? Deny women the right to hold office, to
vote, to even be citizens? Shall our children become subject to manus?
Perhaps you believe we should revive the practice of exposing our unwanted or
orphaned children? Slavery? No, I do not think that is what you meant to
say. And if that is not the kind of society we are building then why should
we restrict ourselves to the kinds of institutions such a society did have?
Those institutions did not even save the Republic you are attempting to
emulate.
Tradition is a body of practices and beliefs held in consensus among the
members of a society. Tradition is built up over a long period of time; it
is not imposed. Tradition is composed of shared values that arise from all
people within the society; it is not handed down from above by one
individual. We may be looking back to ancient Rome for examples, as the
American Founding Fathers had over two-hundred years ago, but we are building
our own tradition, just as they also did. Every action, and every inaction,
performed today sets a precedent for what tomorrow's Nova Roma tradition will
be. Discussion, conferencing, dialogue and review is how to build a
tradition in the nature of the society we now possess.
In less than a year, since you became censor, the population of Nova Roma
has nearly doubled, and it is going to continue to grow exponentially.
Whether you care to overlook it or not, Nova Roma has already changed. It is
no longer the role playing game you seem to envision it to be. Nova Roma has
taken on a life of its own. Either it adjusts to that concept and reflects
the society it is beginning to form or it will become just a game we all once
played. Someone wrote a post saying they would prefer a group of only 100
cives who all shared his common view of Nova Roma. Well, today Nova Roma
already has over 500 members, and next year will likely have over 2000 cives.
Dictatorial methods, poor organization and lack of communication is not
going to hold such a community together. And the choice as to what kind of
community we shall have, now and in the future, is a matter for all of us to
discuss.

Salvete

Gn. Moravius Piscinus
Retarius et Rogator
Sodalitatis Latinitatis


Subject:	[novaroma] Proposal for an unoffical Roman Day gathering of as many NR citizens as possible
From:	"Aurelius Tiberius" <kminer_rsg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 13:30:22 EDT

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Tired of searching for an apartment? Try Viva! It's fast and free.
Now serving Dallas, Houston, Austin, Phoenix, Denver and Las Vegas.
Rent by September 30th - get $100 cash!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9154/8/_/61050/_/968347822/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salve my fellow Cives.

I wanted to take a moment and spark up some discussion and hopefully Some
Action on the realization of a Roman Days for as many people as possible and
in a central location.

Has there ever been an attempt to get us all (or as many as possible)
together??? Well, lets do it.

I am a reenactor so I am a bit loopy when it comes to this drive 12 hours to
play for a weekend thing, but... If we are ever to be a true flesh and
blood nation then we must make a concerted effort to move, no matter how
slowly, to holding a gathering. (The Scots do it every year in Nova Scotia,
and we have been wearing dresses alot longer then them!!) (sorry attempt at
a bit of humor.)

I would ask if anyone might be interested in persuing this further let me
know. and I also humbly ask our Senators and Patricians alike, It was your
commitment and desire that gave birth to us. Please lend it now and help
lead us to this great goal.

I want to put faces to the many friends and countrymen/women I have made in
my time here!!!

SO LET'S DO THIS!!!!!

ATR

Aurelius Tiberius Ronanus
Praefectus Legionis & Tribuni Militum,
Legio VI of the Northern Army
& Cornicularius,Sodalitas Militarium et Nova Roma

"Nos Sumus Romae milites, parati stamus ad potestatem et gloriam eius. Roma
est Lux."
"we are soldiers of Rome, for her might and glory we stand ready... She is
the Light"

www.geocities.com/legio_vi

_________________________________________________________________________
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] A latin Translation request
From:	"Aurelius Tiberius" <kminer_rsg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 13:46:55 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN: Religious articles by Pontifex Iulia Ovidia Luna
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:42:02 +0100


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Proposal for an unoffical Roman Day gathering of as many NR citizens as possible
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:58:33 -0400


Subject:	[novaroma] Gallia list
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:43:52 +0200

-------------------------- 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/_/968352581/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete cives!

Recently I have created a list at eGroups for the cives of Gallia. There are two lists, one for the French-speaking cives from France and Belgium, and the other for the Dutch/Flemish-speaking people from Belgium and the Netherlands.

If you find yourself in one of these lands, or you have a thing for one of these languages, don't hesitate to join one of my lists (or both :-))!

The French list is: NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
The Dutch list is: NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD

Salvete!
S. Apollonius Draco

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Provincia Gallia
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 15:53:40 -0400 (EDT)


Subject:	[novaroma] From thSenior Consul on the Proposal for an unoffical Roman Day gathering et al.
From:	sfp55@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 16:52:22 EDT

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Tired of searching for an apartment? Try Viva! It's fast and free.
Now serving Dallas, Houston, Austin, Phoenix, Denver and Las Vegas.
Rent by September 30th - get $100 cash!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9154/8/_/61050/_/968359956/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Salvete.
I think we would be dealing with several problems here, not just limited to
expensive transportation.
I. You can't just pitch a tent in a field anymore. There are rules and
regulations prohibiting such activity. When I was in HS, the SCA took over
the whole of lower Griffith park in LA for a huge gathering of all the West
Coast Households.
That could never happen today. The cost for permits would be prohibitive.

II. I think right now we should limit ourselves to a Roman days East and
West in the US. While this leaves our European members out, there is nothing
to stop them from organizing their own events. Eventually, we will have one
yearly international gathering on a three day holiday, which will allow the
Senate to meet face to face but that day citizens is still in the distant
future. I have found that universities tend be more sympathetic to our cause
and will give us space to gather for future events provided:
A. We come across a credible historians and researchers, not role players out
to have fun.
B. We promise to repair any damage caused by our activities, and then if
something happens WE DO WHAT WE PROMISED.
C. Nova Roma is always represented in a serious and almost reverent way.
D. Our Gods are not mocked.
That means parodies, and humorous skits are out. Because if we don't respect
ourselves and our beliefs nobody else will.
I also know that many of you are not involved in our religious beliefs. That
is fine, Nova Roma is tolerant of all like ancient Rome, just be respectful
towards them and our priests, you don't have to believe, but you do not have
to go out of your way to express disbelief either. Consider yourselves as
guests in their house and act accordingly.
Valete


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Conscript Fathers (Vado)
From:	Piscinus@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 17:08:18 EDT


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: From thSenior Consul on the Proposal for an unoffical Roman Da...
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 17:28:19 EDT


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Proposal for an unoffical Roman Day gathering of as many NR citizens as possible
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2000 17:50:12 -0500