| Subject: |
[novaroma] latin |
| From: |
"william wheeler" <holyconelia@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:19:34 GMT |
|
Salve
How would you great fine Romai say
" the Honnor is to Serve"
_________________________________________________________________________
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.
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/8/_/61050/_/971745575/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Pro Mentores, contra Patrones |
| From: |
Razenna <razenna@--------> |
| Date: |
Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:39:57 -0700 |
|
Salvete, Quirites.
An interesting post and reply, Vado. And I can not fault your
history. There are some things that I have decided to comment on.
Perhaps it is another viewpoint. My thoughts are not as ordered as
they were during the ride home from work, so I'll be inserting my
comments below.
--- In novaroma@--------, "Nick Ford" <gens_moravia@d...> wrote:
> Quiritibus salutem
>
> Only since you asked, mi Curio, the plural of 'paterfamilias' is
> 'patresfamilias' (I can see why the fathers are plural, but why is
it still
> only one family? Can anyone explain, please?)
*****
I could make some hypothetical suppositions, but I'd rather do that in
a personal bull session than a public discussion. [wink]
Gratias tibi ago for the plural.
>
> Now, to the rest of Curio and Aurelia's exchange:
>
> This idea of having new sui iuris citizens (newcomers, head of a
gens of
> one) was mooted last year but for some reason got nowhere. I also
think it's
> a good one, as a substitute for the help and guidance senior members
of an
> adopting gens would otherwise be able to provide.
>
> However, I don't believe that, at this early stage in our
development, we
> can't afford more new gentes and I certainly wouldn't like to see a
system
> of clientela built up in this new Rome of ours which is (I hope)
going to
> continue to be a freer society than ancient Rome ever was. We don't
have
> slaves any more, so there are no liberti (freedmen or freedwomen)
with a
> lifelong obligation to their former masters or mistresses
(patrones).
>
> By all means let's put together a list of willing citizens who can
act as
> mentors for newcomers (many of us already do so informally), and by
all
> means let there be a spirit of grateful obligation - it exists
already in
> Nova Roma - but let it be voluntary and a matter of personal honour,
not one
> of expectation, i.e. that because A has shown B around and given
some advice
> (one would hope, unbiased advice), or given them a job, B is
therefore
> obligated to vote for A in the elections, attack A's enemies, fawn
on A's
> friends, continue working for A no matter what, etc.
*****
Yes, Nova Roma has had people who are willing to give a hand to
newcomers since its beginning. Perhaps it has shown its unofficial
nature, the welcoming and helping, by some new citizens getting more
assistance than others. It is also possible that there would be this
unevenness if an "official organized system" was set up.
Clientela are a bad idea. Agreed. I recall that the previous
discussion about some sort of curtailment of one person gens got lost
in a discussion of clientela. It seems that the clientela idea is a
favorite some people (of course I'm sure their visualization is some
improved kind and gentle modern form of it). One idea can get lost
track of when another idea distracts everybody. Maybe that is an
axiom of internet discussions. Maybe it is a part of face to face
ones too. I think so. I believe there is no reason to outlaw one
person gens. Or as Vado says, not at this point with our present
size. There is one negative factor of the singer person gens that I
can think of. In some cases they tie up some great Roman names. In
some cases, not in all.
Yes. Let any sense of obligation be voluntary and a matter of
personal honor. Any one who expects, demands a sense of obligation in
return for assistance (a "favor") probably has no personal honor. Or
has some perverted definition of the concept "Honor". [BTW: How
divergent is "Honos" from "Honor"?]
I'm leaving in your history sketch in case somebody missed it and
wants to read it. It is something that should be remembered. It
should be remembered that there is more of the ancient Roman culture
and civilization that we must leave in the dust than slavery, the
chattle status of women and armed conquest.
>
> The idea of one person owning another in that way (like modern Mafia
> obligations) is not, in my view, a road we want to go down. Just
because
> something is anciently Roman and because it worked after a fashion
is not
> good or sufficient reason not to see the need to jettison it (or,
better in
> this case, not resurrect it), if it has potentially dangerous
consequences.
>
> Look at what clientela did to the late Republic: politics became
gang
> warfare, then gangs of clientes escalated to private armies... and
Rome
> ended up being run by the most successful Godfather of them all.
>
> Look at what clientela and notions of owning people did to the later
Empire,
> when after Diocletian society became ever more fixed and ultimately
rigidly
> stratified: the people at the bottom who were kept there by
aristocratic
> self-interest had no stake in the res publica (which had become Res
> Privata), little prospect of advancement and weren't about to give
their
> lives to defend it from the barbarians. Why should they? These
proto-serfs
> can hardly be accused of disloyalty, since loyalty has to work both
ways. In
> socio-historical terms, it is a short step from social obligation to
legal
> compulsion. Patria Potestas (the legendary power of the
paterfamilias) also
> needs a long critical examination in this light.
>
> As Livia Cornelia suggests, the process of adoptio needs some
codification.
> Thus far in NR, no plebeian gens has been allowed to adopt a member
of a
> patrician gens, and the power of the patresfamilias has been
interpreted to
> mean that the head of the gens can prevent a junior member from
leaving that
> gens for another against his/her wishes. All newcomers should take
careful
> note of this. After only two years, we are already in danger of
becoming a
> society one is free to join, free to leave but while one is in it
one is
> circumscribed by laws without equity.
>
> Both these unnecessarily restrictive practices above have been
justified
> purely on the grounds that they were 'Roman'. Lots of things were
Roman at
> some time or other. That doesn't mean that they were desirable then,
or now.
*********
The process of Adoptio: Vado, you are a bit off on some of the
above. So far as I know there has never been an instance of a
plebeian gens having the occasion to adopt a member of a patrician
gens. But maybe one instance you obliquely refer to was patrician to
plebeian, but that was not the rub in that case. This was the case
where a man wanted to leave a patrician gens. The paterfamilias
refused to let him leave. I was one of many people who thought this
was not only a stupid thing to try and do, it was also asking for
trouble. The man who wished to leave the gens simply became more and
more abusive of the paterfamilias until the "divorce" was granted.
(In my anthropology classes we were told of a similar tactic used by
nomadic bedouin women when they wanted a divorce. Only a man may
"divorce" but a woman can make life a living hell in that type
socio-cultural system. [And, No. the husband is not relay free to
kill the wife who keeps hitting him over the head. It would start a
blood feud.]) Back to Roma, Nova et Antigua...
That case can be cited as precedent that patresfamilias can deny
freedom to a familia member. One case does not make much of a
precedent. It is an incident. And might be best judged on a gens by
gens basis. There was a subsequent incident where a paterfamilias was
thought to have denied a familia member his permission to be adopted
into another gens. But that was actually miscommunication. I spoke
with the paterfamilias in this incident and he said that he had not
received an official request before the person who wanted to go
elsewhere started a big fuss about not being allowed to depart. So,
this doesn't give the interpretation of the Nova Roma pater potestas
that you speak of, Vado.
You are correct that newcomers should take careful note of this. What
the few incidents we have had do show is that some patresfamilias can
make a royal stink about someone wanting to leave their gens. This is
indeed where the idea of new citizens joining a gens for a "learning
period" falls apart. Whether the people would want to leave to join
some other gens, or to start their own, would run into the whim of the
paterfamilias of the gens they joined when they entered Nova Roma.
But as I said above, a few incidents to not make precedent.
Especially when they are not consistent.
Early in Nova Roma I asked ... I think it was Cassius, but it could
have been one of the other first three ... if a paterfamilias
traditional potestas over the lives of his familia could be
interpreted in Nova Roma as being able to expel someone from Nova
Roma. This being an organizational form of death. I was told, No. A
paterfamilias could kick someone out of their gens, but that person
would still be a citizen, who would have to find a gens or found a
gens. I relate this for the sake of another light on the pater
postestas in Nova Roma.
To my knowledge, Nova Roma has not had many cases at all of people
wanting to leave gentes, to be adopted or to found their own. The
ones I have cited are the only ones I know of. I repeat: That I Know
Of. In my experience people are proud of the gens they are in. Down
right familial. I have onlyl two others in my gens. I would be proud
of gens Aelia if it were just myself. If I was told that I HAD to
join another gens because mine was too small I would be very upset.
[Read MUCH understatement in that emotion!] My name IS Aelius
Ericius. We should not mess with the gens system. It, like
everything else about this grand experiment, is still developing.
Just as the Egressus program is new and developing. we'll get there.
If we survive. We'll survive, if we don't make a bunch of really big
and really stupid mistakes. =({[;-)
Ave Roma Immortalis!
C. Aelius Ericius.
[end of my part]
>
> The Rome of Quirinus was founded on voluntary association and
willing
> co-operation (unless you were a Sabine woman, of course). Fugitives
from
> other societies found new freedom in Rome. But in course of time
the
> patricians found it convenient to forget who their distant ancestors
> probably were. You don't make a start by compelling people, but you
can
> make an end that way any time you like. History is a boneyard of
examples.
>
> Floreat Nova Roma diique deaeque omnes illa bene semper ament.
>
> Vado.
>
>
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:17:59 -0600
> > From: <gmvick32@-------->
> > Subject: Re: Re: New Citizens and all the Vadonian posts
> >
> > Salvete, Scaurus et Omnes:
> >
> > Thanks, I'm glad you liked my buddy suggestion.
> >
> > I think we could stand to tighten up a bit when allowing new gens
to be
> > created. It's not a matter of prohibiting new gens, rather it's
using the
> > concept of the gens for its most natural application....as a
source of
> > instant community and a basic unit of the res publica.
> >
> > If you look at the Album Gentium, you'll see we have a high number
of own
> > person gens, and I would suspect (though I have no proof) that a
lot of
> them
> > aren't participating in Nova Roma.
> >
> > That said, it raises the question of how to promote gens
membership. I
> > think it's very hard to be a new person and know which gens is
right for
> > you. Going on the basis of interest in a historical personage
(like I
> did)
> > is kind of scary. Since the gens is a sort of family, you want a
chance
> to
> > know what you're stepping into. To that end, it wouldn't be such
a bad
> idea
> > to have the ability to come into Nova Roma, have a look around,
and then
> > seek adoption/formal entry into a gens. Which still gets us back
to
> having
> > "buddies", and also raises the issue of having a formal procedure
for
> > requesting adoption and/or gens reassignment.
> >
> > Not that we don't have a way to do it now, but I'll be damned if I
can
> point
> > to a place where it's stated how to request adoption.
> >
> > Livia Cor. Aurelia
> >
> >
> > marcusaemiliusscaurus@-------- wrote:
> >
> > > Salve Quirites,
> > >
> > > I think that, while I see the point of preventing new citizens
from
> > > starting new gens, surely that means that no new gens are
created?
> > >
> > > After all, we can hardly ask a person to be a member of someone
> > > else's gens, and then change their identity completely!
> > >
> > > I think, that for all new paterfamilii, (Is that right?) we
should
> > > adopt the previously suggested idea of a buddy, and in all other
> > > cases, let the other gens members show them the ropes.
> > >
> > > Valete,
> > > Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/8/_/61050/_/971750468/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Pro Mentores, contra Patrones |
| From: |
marcusaemiliusscaurus@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:26:18 -0000 |
|
Salve Quirites,
Caius Aelius Ericius, I agree with much of what you said. I am the
only member of my gens. But why should I have to be named after any
other than my illustrious namesake simply because no one else wishes
to be a Scribonius?
I also agree that we should not make any major change to the gens
system, since it continues to serve us well. That does not mean we
cannnot adapt other things to enhance its use. As people say, there
are many unofficial "Buddies" who help new citizens out. What if we
were to leave all the people who join existing gens well alone, and
let their Roman relations show them the ropes? We could then
concentrate on the new gens creators.
We could make it slightly more official, simply to make sure that
everyone has someone to teach them about NR. we could possibly make
a database of the names and provincae of everyone who volunteered to
buddy up with a new citizen. Then, if someone, say, from Provincia
Nova Britannia created a new gens, the maker of the database could
select someone who lived in that Provincia, and e-mail them asking if
they were not to busy to buddy up with the new citizen! I think
this would make life a lot easier, and would ensure that everyone had
a friend (NOT a client!) in NR as soon as they joined.
As I said above, I know plenty of people do this unofficially,
(That's what happened to me) but for those unlucky people who aren't
approached, I think it would be nice to make sure they are.
I know I for one would be happy to build and maintain such a database.
Valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/8/_/61050/_/971781983/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Pro Mentores, contra Patrones |
| From: |
<gmvick32@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 06:32:58 -0600 |
|
Salve Quirites:
What Britannicus describes is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind,
though I wouldn't limit it's use to just creators of new gens. Especially
if we could hook people up with somebody close to them, it would benefit
everybody to have a "buddy". For example, I'm about 1,500 miles away from
my closest gens member. That makes it a bit lonely out here!! A buddy in
my area would help a lot.
My bringing this up was in no way to suggest a clientship would arise. I
abhor the idea of having clients.
Livia Cor Aurelia
marcusaemiliusscaurus@-------- wrote:
> Salve Quirites,
>
> Caius Aelius Ericius, I agree with much of what you said. I am the
> only member of my gens. But why should I have to be named after any
> other than my illustrious namesake simply because no one else wishes
> to be a Scribonius?
>
> I also agree that we should not make any major change to the gens
> system, since it continues to serve us well. That does not mean we
> cannnot adapt other things to enhance its use. As people say, there
> are many unofficial "Buddies" who help new citizens out. What if we
> were to leave all the people who join existing gens well alone, and
> let their Roman relations show them the ropes? We could then
> concentrate on the new gens creators.
>
> We could make it slightly more official, simply to make sure that
> everyone has someone to teach them about NR. we could possibly make
> a database of the names and provincae of everyone who volunteered to
> buddy up with a new citizen. Then, if someone, say, from Provincia
> Nova Britannia created a new gens, the maker of the database could
> select someone who lived in that Provincia, and e-mail them asking if
> they were not to busy to buddy up with the new citizen! I think
> this would make life a lot easier, and would ensure that everyone had
> a friend (NOT a client!) in NR as soon as they joined.
>
> As I said above, I know plenty of people do this unofficially,
> (That's what happened to me) but for those unlucky people who aren't
> approached, I think it would be nice to make sure they are.
>
> I know I for one would be happy to build and maintain such a database.
>
> Valete,
> Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
>
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/8/_/61050/_/971784592/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Pro Mentores, contra Patrones |
| From: |
"Caius Flavius Diocletianus" <3s@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:30:24 +0200 |
|
Caius Flavius Diocletianus Quiritibus S.P.D.
The main points in this discussion are
- the gens adoption
- the problem of helping new citizen.
To the gens topic:
When I joined, I chose my name after one of the most interesting gens in
ancient rome, Flavia. I did not know, which gens in Nova Roma it would be,
nor I asked where the gens members live and who is the paterfamilias. I
think these points are fairly unimportant for new citizens, when they have
to choose their name. The most, I think, do it in my way. So they develope
their name and are suddenly paterfamilias of a new gens. I think that is not
a problem. The gens system served NR well.
To the "buddy" topic:
This is an important point. Many new citizens feel alone. The informal
Mentor or "buddy" system is an ad-hoc-help. I had contact with a new citizen
today and this point was discussed, too.
In the past, I was such a mentor for some new citizens living in the
Germania province. I think this is one of the tasks a provincial official
has to fulfill. But the main problem is that the governor or the legate has
no information when a new citizen joins, who lives in the regarding
province.
In Germany, where I work in a small municipality administration, many cities
have "citizens brochures" with the basic informations for new citizens of
this city. This is an idea suitable for Nova Roma, too. If we have such an
brochure, this could be good help for all newcomers. The brochure could be
developed in different languages, because not all newcomers are good
english-speakers. The brochure could kept online for download and print.
Itīs only a basic idea, and perhaps a good job for the Sodalitas Egressus.
Comments are welcome.
Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Legatus Germaniae
----- Original Message -----
From: <marcusaemiliusscaurus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 1:26 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Pro Mentores, contra Patrones
> Salve Quirites,
>
> Caius Aelius Ericius, I agree with much of what you said. I am the
> only member of my gens. But why should I have to be named after any
> other than my illustrious namesake simply because no one else wishes
> to be a Scribonius?
>
> I also agree that we should not make any major change to the gens
> system, since it continues to serve us well. That does not mean we
> cannnot adapt other things to enhance its use. As people say, there
> are many unofficial "Buddies" who help new citizens out. What if we
> were to leave all the people who join existing gens well alone, and
> let their Roman relations show them the ropes? We could then
> concentrate on the new gens creators.
>
> We could make it slightly more official, simply to make sure that
> everyone has someone to teach them about NR. we could possibly make
> a database of the names and provincae of everyone who volunteered to
> buddy up with a new citizen. Then, if someone, say, from Provincia
> Nova Britannia created a new gens, the maker of the database could
> select someone who lived in that Provincia, and e-mail them asking if
> they were not to busy to buddy up with the new citizen! I think
> this would make life a lot easier, and would ensure that everyone had
> a friend (NOT a client!) in NR as soon as they joined.
>
> As I said above, I know plenty of people do this unofficially,
> (That's what happened to me) but for those unlucky people who aren't
> approached, I think it would be nice to make sure they are.
>
> I know I for one would be happy to build and maintain such a database.
>
> Valete,
> Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/8/_/61050/_/971785860/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Microworld |
| From: |
clemyeats@-------- |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:22:57 -0000 |
|
Dear all,
We've been watching your community for one week now and we find it
very interesting. Even if our nation seem to be very different in
some aspects, we'd be glad to introduce you to our world and show you
what our nation is.
Our website is http://www.citeweb.net/ydemos/index.htm
Our mailing list is ydemos@--------
Feel free to come and see us, tourists are very welcome. :)
PS : Unfortunately we don't speak latin at all, and our english is
not so good.. we're a french speaking country. But is it really a
problem ?
Amicalement,
Citizens of Ydemos.
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/8/_/61050/_/971792585/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Latin Questions |
| From: |
"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 19:22:26 +0200 |
|
M. Apollonius Formosanus Rogatoribus de Lingua Latina S.P.D.
There have been a few questions recently about Latin, so let me offer
some help:
I. Vado scripsit:
Only since you asked, mi Curio, the plural of 'paterfamilias' is
'patresfamilias' (I can see why the fathers are plural, but why is it
still
only one family? Can anyone explain, please?)
"Familias" is an old singular genitive. It is equivalent to "Familiae"
in more modern Latin. "Pater familias" = "Father of the family".
II. "The honour is to serve."
If this means serve the Respublica, for example by military service:
Honos/Honor est (de Republica) merere/mereri.
III. I live and I die.
Vivo et morior.
Valete!
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/8/_/61050/_/971803471/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Titus |
| From: |
"Stefaan Bekaert" <bekaert.stefaan@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:05:42 +0200 |
|
Salvete omnes,
Yesterday, I've seen the movie Titus with Anthony Hopkins, which is based on a theatre of Shakespeare. The movie was absolutely fabulous and the language used in it alone makes it worth to watch it a second time. But there is one thing that still isn't clear to me : during the entire movie, there were soldiers armed with swords, but with rifles as well ; there were soldiers on their horses, but soldiers riding motorcycles as well. I've found out that those things represent the reign of Mussolini, but why is that time part of this movie ? Surely, Shakespear hasn't written about guns, motorcycles or Mussolini, so it's a personal touch by the director, but why ? To show that suffer is from all times ? If anyone here has seen this movie and knows the answer, please let me know.
Vale !
L. Apollonius Aquila
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/8/_/61050/_/971806062/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Titus |
| From: |
"Lauriat" <blauriat@--------> |
| Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2000 15:38:57 -0400 |
|
Well, if you saw the film then you know that the rifles, motorcycles and
other modern military paraphenalia were obviously not the only anachronistic
touches-it was full of them. My guess is that the director's idea was to
make the film timeless-it is not ancient Rome, it is not Elizabethan, it is
not modern. It is a story by Shakespeare about Ancient Rome, set outside of
time. I loved the costumes-they really accentuate the lovely hodge-podge of
ancient, modern and entirely imaginary. I am usually a purist when it comes
to historical films, but when watching Titus I just reminded myself that if
I were making the always difficult choice of choosing a time period for a
play written hundreds of years ago about a time a thousand years before it,
I might opt for a more fanciful approach myself, since perfect historical
detail under those circumstances would be near-impossible. Plus, I
absolutely loved the scene involving Anthony Hopkins in a chef suit (I won't
say any more than that!) and I wouldn't trade it for any historical purity
in the world.
-Lauria Maria Crispa
----- Original Message -----
From: Stefaan Bekaert <bekaert.stefaan@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 2:05 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Titus
> Salvete omnes,
>
> Yesterday, I've seen the movie Titus with Anthony Hopkins, which is based
on a theatre of Shakespeare. The movie was absolutely fabulous and the
language used in it alone makes it worth to watch it a second time. But
there is one thing that still isn't clear to me : during the entire movie,
there were soldiers armed with swords, but with rifles as well ; there were
soldiers on their horses, but soldiers riding motorcycles as well. I've
found out that those things represent the reign of Mussolini, but why is
that time part of this movie ? Surely, Shakespear hasn't written about guns,
motorcycles or Mussolini, so it's a personal touch by the director, but why
? To show that suffer is from all times ? If anyone here has seen this movie
and knows the answer, please let me know.
>
> Vale !
> L. Apollonius Aquila
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/8/_/61050/_/971810814/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
|
