Forum Romanum


Subject:	[novaroma] Cista Question?
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 17:53:55 -0600

6 Dec 2000

Salve

I have just been to the Cista, and while looking over the candidates I was not completely sure as to the exact number of positions where available per office. I am wondering if this could be shown on the Cista page so citizens like myself that are confused a bit can be helped out. Or maybe someone could let me know this information. Thank you.

Vale

Quintus Sertorius

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

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976147520/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Things To Do
From:	"M. Papirius Justus" <papirius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 19:02:04 -0500

At 05:11 PM 06/12/2000, Mike Macnair wrote:
I agree in principle with this view, and my draft of civil procedure was
based on it, albeit following the formulary system rather than the cognitio
system which prevailed in the later Empire.

Respondeo:

Both systems have their benefits depending on the case; actually, it is my
belief that the cognitio system was rather more 'formulaic' than is
generally recognized (you'll have to read the diss. for that one; I'll have
to finish the diss. too)

{snip}

Scripsisti:
The main difficulty is, of course, that the laws should be readily knowable
by the citizens.

Respondeo:

I'm not so sure that that is really so important. Really the laws should be
known readily by those who will be interpreting them and or altering them.
They can and should be approached by those in need of help. (note, I'm not
suggesting the laws not be 'accessible'; just that there's no need for the
citizens to be able to recite, e.g., the twelve tables by heart or whatever).
[snip]

Scripsisti

In any case, while the Digest is said largely to follow the order of the
Perpetual Edict, this order is the product of history more than it is of
ease of finding things.

Respondeo:

I have in my tepid little hand a slim little volume which might serve our
purposes well as far as an 'outline' goes. It's *The Fragments of the
Perpetual Edict of Salvius Julianus* "collected, arranged, and annotated by
Bryan Walker". It's a Cambridge U thing from 1877. It provides a very
usable scheme for our purposes, reconstructing the perpetual edict as
something in five parts:

I. Deals with initial proceedings
a) editio actionis
b)vocatio in ius
c) postulationes
d) settlement of vadimonium
e) appointments of a cognitor or procurator (when necessary)
f) sureties
g) issue of a formula

II. Deals with the 'in court' proceedings
a)hearing of evidence by the iudex
b)the award in accordance with the formula

... this section is further subdivided into the different types of actions
(this is where much of the laws actually are)

III. Deals with the effects of Judgements
IV. Deals with praetorian remedies
V. Deals with laws regarding persons

What's nice about this volume if you can track it down is that it makes
reference to the relevant Digest sections (which could be trimmed of
course) and it wouldn't be difficult to supplement it with updated
decisions from the Codex and various other collections of rescripta (in
regards to translations, the Digest has been admirably translated by Alan
Watson and Co.; the Codex and other rescripta up to Diocletian I have
translated much of myself ... pardon the awkward phraseology).

Just some food for thought ...

mpj

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976148160/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Comitia Plebis Tributa summoned!
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:43:07 EST

Salvete Plebian Citizens of Nova Roma!

The Comitia Plebis Tributa is summoned to assemble on 07 December to
elect the Tribunes of the Plebs and the Plebian Aediles fo rthe next year.
Assemble to vote at:

<http://www.novaroma.org/cursus_honorum/voting/>

The candidates are:

Plebeian Aedile; Sextus Apollonius Draco;
Plebeian Aedile; Marcus Arminius Maior;

Tribunus Plebis; Aurelius Tiberius Ronanus;
Tribunus Plebis; Titus Labienus Fortunatus;
Tribunus Plebis; Gnaeus Moravius Piscinus;
Tribunus Plebis; Gnaeus Tarquinius Caesar;
Tribunus Plebis; Alexander Iulius Caesar Probus Macedonius;

May each of as instruments of Deity, however we conceptualize and honor
it, choose wisely to preserve and advance our Republic!

Valete!

Lucius Sergius Australicus
Tribunus Plebis

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976149794/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Class Conlfict
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:43:05 EST

Salve Draco,

This thing about always claiming others are losing their tempers seems to
be a favorite theme of yours. Is this how the Apollonii conduct debates?
Grab one fantasy theme and keep repeating it unendingly in the
supposition that eventually others will believe it's true?

On 12/6/00 8:52 AM S. Apollonius Draco (hendrik.meuleman@--------) wrote:

>Salve Australice,
>
>> This is truly disingenuous. Where is the "class struggle" when we bloody
>> well HAVE NO CLASS DIFFERENCES HERE?
>
>*blinks in amazement*. We have different classes, you know. That word
>implies that there are differences. Although they are not large differences,
>as I admit, there are some, as has been pointed out here recently.
Your amazement suggests how out of touch your group really is - there are
no classes here. If you refer to the purely symbolic, cosmetic assignment
of "patrician" and "plebian," you have to be really fantasizing to make
that into any kind of "class difference."

>
>> Where are the statements that people should not vote for enthusiastic
>> newcomers "because they are:....?" Who is making them? Where?
>
>We have been accused of being Athenian reconstructionists, political fashion
>butterflies, and destroyers of Nova Roma. You are one of those people who
>have accused the AD in this manner. I can look up the posts if you want me
>to.
I don't know that I ever advised others not to vote for anyone, mainly
because I don't think it necessary to do so. Those who seek to undermine
Nova Roma in a fit of pique because they can't have everything their own
self-righteous way have given the voters of Nova Roma quite enough basis
on which to decide for themselves for whom to vote.

>
>> And you yourself are SURELY a big part of that 5% that generates most of
>> the email here!
>
>So are you. And I.

And your point is...? Vado was trying to make himself out to be a part of
an unheard minority, when the reality is he is one of the "Dominators of
Discourse" here. (A bit of hyperbole there - don't get bent out of shape
and post six more messages about it.)
>
>> You're making this all up like a writer of cheap fiction - do you really
>> expect some poor newbies to swallow this stuff and rush to your support?
>> Vado the Savior of the Masses! Save us from "Them!"
>>
>> This is too much! I know this kind of balogna has been traditional in our
>> election seasons, BUT... do you know no limits?????
>
>I'd advise you to cool down for a while. If you lose your temper, you lose
>the game. And there's too much at stake.

Nothing like a computer to let you quote out of context and assign your
own interpretation, eh Draco? Tell us all, please, what's at stake in
your view. You say that your faction isn't actually seeking to overthrow
the Republic or to make any drastic changes or to wreak any kind of mad
vengeance, so what are the big stakes to which you refer here?

Vale,
L. Sergius Aust. Obst.

>
>Vale bene,
>Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
><< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
>Legatus Galliae Borealis,
>Procurator Galliae,
>Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
>--**--
>There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
>--**--
>Novaromain? Parlez-vous francais? Cliquez ici!:
>http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
>Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
>http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
>Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
>http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
>--**--

certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976149832/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] More compliments
From:	"Marcos Boehme" <m_arminius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 21:49:22 -0300

Salvete, Quirites

I want to compliment effusivelly Lucius Pompeius Octavianus and the cives of Argentina, for the creation of their province, the first south american to be Praetor Provincialis!
My best wishes to you, Lucius! May your province grow and prosper!

As a member of the Sodalitas Musarum, is a pleasure to note that it is now official! Congratulations to Pompeia Cornelia et alii. Also, congratulations, Pompeia, for your praetorship!

Congratulations to Quintus Sertorius, new praetor in Canada. Good luck for you!

And, a bit late :), i want to compliment the new flamines, Gn Moravius Piscinius, Flamen Cerealis, and M Cornelius Scriptor, Flamen Quirinalis, named ten days ago.

Salvete

Marcus Arminius Maior
Provincia Brasilia
PETITOR Aedilis Plebis

Great Gift Idea! FREE cell phone, internet ready at Lycos Marketplace
http://www.inphonic.lycos.com/redirect.asp?referringpage=www.lycosd1

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976150174/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Request for more wit on Ancient Romen Jobs and Arena Games
From:	"LegionXXIV" <legionXXIV@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 20:06:23 -0500

I want to deeply thank you all for your responses to the recent question I
asked for my assignment, that I had to seek out from advanced Roman
Empire enthusiasts / aficionados. From people like yourselves
who very kindly replied, I obtained some wittily perceptive tips and
angles, that helped enormously. May I pose the two final questions below.

I've been asked by my teacher two final questions to seek out creatively
witty /
imaginative responses from advanced Roman Empire enthusiasts and I
promise it's the very last time I'll pose any more and get on people�s
nerves.

- Describe your current job (or if you dislike your present part or
full time job, the ideal present day job you'd love to be presently
working in) as it might have been / would be in Ancient Rome.

- What changes (serious,humorous or both) you'd make to the traditional
Roman Gladiator games to improve them.

I was reading the dude who hatched �Gladiator� � David Franzoni (who
also wrote Amistad) is secretly working on a new project, that sounds
like it�ll be a Gladiator / Braveheart combo - a gritty,un-mytholgical,
un-mystical version of King Arthur,with no sword in the stone magic or
mysticism. The new take will be pegged more on �history� and less on
myth and looks at the politics of the period during which Arthur ruled,
when the Roman empire collapsed and skirmishes over power broke
out in outlying countries.

Thanks again and Holiday Greetings for a
Happy New Millennium !

Sincerely,

Paul Mills

<ptmvx@-------->

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976151223/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Cista Question?
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:26:59 -0600

6 Dec 2000

Salve

Thank once again for a very timly reply.

Vale

QS

----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcus Octavius Germanicus" <haase@-------->
To: "Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Cista Question?

> Salve Quinte Sertori,
>
> > I have just been to the Cista, and while looking over the candidates I
> > was not completely sure as to the exact number of positions where
available
> > per office. I am wondering if this could be shown on the Cista page so
> > citizens like myself that are confused a bit can be helped out. Or maybe
> > someone could let me know this information. Thank you.
>
> We are electing: 1 censor, 2 consuls, 2 praetors, 2 curule aediles,
> 2 plebeian aediles, 2 tribunes, 1 curator araneae (webmaster),
> 1 curator sermonis (listmaster), 8 quaestors, and 2 rogatores.
>
> Vote for one person for each position, and the top "N" vote-getters
> will take office.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Curule Aedile, Nova Roma
>
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976153104/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Thank you
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:33:12 -0600

6 Dec 2000

Salve All

I will keep this short, as I know we are all very occupied with the elections at present. I would like to take this time to thank all those that have supported me on my request for Praetorship of Canada Occidentalis. I will not let Nova Roma, or the Provincia down.

Vale

Quintus Sertorius

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

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976153477/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Cista Question?
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:26:59 -0600


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rescheduled CANDIDATES FORUM
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 02:39:31 -0000

Salvete Novae Romae:

I have confirmed the rescheduled date and time of the Candidates' Forum with
Censoral Candidate Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus.

He has advised me that he shall make every effort to attend.>>
>

I repost the following announcement of this morning made by G. Moravius
Piscinus, for the benefit of those who may not have seen it.

Bene vale,
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo
Candidate Forum Moderatrix
>
>The Candidates Forum scheduled for today, Wednesday 6 Dec, has
>been moved to
>
>Sunday 10 Dec. GMT 20.00
>
>
>
>12:00 PM PAC=3:00 PM EDST=9:00 PM CENT EURO=6:30 AM Monday S.
>AUSTRALIA
>
>
>
>Hostess Pompeia Cornelia Strabo
>
>The panel of candidates shall appear in the Forum Romanorum
>chat room, also known as the taverna.
>
>
>
>The panel shall consist of
>
>
>
>M. Marcius Rex
>
>Vedius Germanicus
>
>Cassius Julianus
>
>Moravius Vado
>
>Flavius Diocletianus
>
>Cornelius Scipio
>
>Apollonius Formosanus
>
>Fabius Maximus
>
>
>
>Each panel member shall in turn make one statement in three
>lines. They will each then have an opportunity to ask a question of any of
>the
>other candidates to respond to.
>
>All Citizens are invited and encouraged to attend. We
>ask that that you refrain from joining in the chat until the conclusion of
>our
>Candidate Forum. Citizens will have an opportunity to then ask questions
>of the candidates who remain available.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sponsored by Gn. Moravius Piscinus and Cornelius Sulla
>Felix
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976156785/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: For the "Cursus Honorum - a new lex"!
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 02:56:57 -0000

I will judge any proposed law when I see it, but in general I am not in
favor of legislating the Cursus Honorum, as I believe it will prevent
qualified newcomers from seeking office. It is my belief that Nova Roma
needs all the energetic officeholders it can get, and that experience
does not necessarily equal commitment or ability.

P. Cassia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976157829/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Edictum primum provinciae Argentiniae
From:	"Lucius Pompeius Octavianus" <octavianuslucius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 03:02:57 -0000

Salvete quirites omnes

As praetor of Provincia Argentina I do hereby declare my first
edictum:

1)I�ve just created the official mailing list for this province.
Its
URL is : http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Argentina . This list is for
any communication within the province, and open to all NR citizens
living in Argentina since it is a provincial list.

2)The first official language of the province is Spanish.

3)Any communication with the central administration of NR and the
others provinces will be made in English.

4)In the case that others NR provinces have Spanish as an official
language, then this language will be allowed in the communication
with those spanish speaking provinces.

5)Latin language is the second official language of this province,
and always permitted.

Valete bene et habete fortunam bonam

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Praetor Provinci� Argentin�

Scribebam Bonari�, a.d. VII Non. Dec. MMDCCLIII a.u.c.

--------------

Spanish version. Versi�n en espa�ol

Salvete quirites omnes

Como praetor de la provincia Argentina, declaro por la presente mi
primer edictum :

1)Acabo de crear la lista de correo oficial para esta provincia. El
URL es : http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Argentina . Esta lista es
para cualquier comunicaci�n dentro de la provincia, y abierta a
todos
los ciudadanos novaromanos que viven en la Argentina, puesto que es
una lista provincial.

2)La primera lengua oficial de la provincia es el espa�ol.

3)Cualquier comunicaci�n con el gobierno central de Nova Roma y
dem�s
provincias ser� en ingl�s.

4)En el caso en que otras provincias tengan el idioma espa�ol como
lengua oficial, el mismo podr� ser utilizado en la comunicaci�n
con
las mismas.

5)El lat�n es la segunda lengua oficial de la provincia, y siempre
ser� permitido su uso.

Valete bene et habete fortunam bonam

Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Praetor Provinci� Argentin�

Scribebam Bonari�, a.d. VII Non. Dec. MMDCCLIII a.u.c.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976158186/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 21:44:43 -0600

T Labienus Censoribus Quiritibusque S P D

A thought has occurred to me. Two candidates have already stated that
they are running in the hopes of being excepted from the Lex Iunia de
Magistratum Aetate by the censores and Senate. I wish them both luck,
and applaud their desire to serve the res publica. It is, however,
quite possible that there are some others who have not informed the
people that they may not be able to assume office due to the law. It
has been nearly a year since the passage of the law, and it is quite
possible that some of our candidates have either forgotten or are too
new to have known about its specific requirements.

I would, therefore, like to ask the censores to let us know if anyone
else is under the age required to serve in the office for which he or
she is running. I am not asking that they reveal what the person's age
is, but merely whether or not a special dispensation would need to be
made for each candidate.

The minimum ages required are:
27 for censor or consul
25 for praetor or tribunus plebis
21 for quaestor, aedile, or any of the Vigintisexviri

While nothing requires a candidate to announce whether or not he or she
meets the requirements of Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate, I believe
that everyone is entitled to know whether or not the candidate of his or
her choice meets the requirements stated in the law. Any candidate that
does not meet its requirements would need the approval of both censores
and 2/3 of the Senate in order to serve their term of office. This is a
major factor to weigh when considering one's choice.

Valete

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976160622/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 21:01:27 -0800

Ave,

As 1/2 of the Censorship, let me state my personal opinion. It is my
belief, that an applicant would need to get the exemption prior to his
announcment of candidacy. As in the case of C. Sentius, he came to me
personally, asked me about my own interpretation on that and if he should
announce. I advisded him against it. Instead, I advisded him to contact
the Censors and the Senate separately and first. Once he has the exemption
in hand, then he could make the announcement. As, you know, T. Labienus,
there was a Senatorial discussion that was started and the result was that
C. Sentius was appointed a Rogator scribe. So, in my professional and legal
opinion those who announced the candidacy without seeking the exemption are
not legally candidates. In my personal opinion, to deviate from seeking the
exemption first shows contempt to the Senate and the laws of the Republic.
Again, this is only my personal opinion. But, I will vote against any
exemption from those candidates that failed to seek exemption prior to the
announcement of their candidacy.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Fortunatus wrote:

> T Labienus Censoribus Quiritibusque S P D
>
> A thought has occurred to me. Two candidates have already stated that
> they are running in the hopes of being excepted from the Lex Iunia de
> Magistratum Aetate by the censores and Senate. I wish them both luck,
> and applaud their desire to serve the res publica. It is, however,
> quite possible that there are some others who have not informed the
> people that they may not be able to assume office due to the law. It
> has been nearly a year since the passage of the law, and it is quite
> possible that some of our candidates have either forgotten or are too
> new to have known about its specific requirements.
>
> I would, therefore, like to ask the censores to let us know if anyone
> else is under the age required to serve in the office for which he or
> she is running. I am not asking that they reveal what the person's age
> is, but merely whether or not a special dispensation would need to be
> made for each candidate.
>
> The minimum ages required are:
> 27 for censor or consul
> 25 for praetor or tribunus plebis
> 21 for quaestor, aedile, or any of the Vigintisexviri
>
> While nothing requires a candidate to announce whether or not he or she
> meets the requirements of Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate, I believe
> that everyone is entitled to know whether or not the candidate of his or
> her choice meets the requirements stated in the law. Any candidate that
> does not meet its requirements would need the approval of both censores
> and 2/3 of the Senate in order to serve their term of office. This is a
> major factor to weigh when considering one's choice.
>
> Valete
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976165302/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2000 23:26:08 -0600 (CST)

Salve Luci Corneli,

> In my personal opinion, to deviate from seeking the
> exemption first shows contempt to the Senate and the laws of the Republic.
> Again, this is only my personal opinion. But, I will vote against any
> exemption from those candidates that failed to seek exemption prior to the
> announcement of their candidacy.

Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus asked at least twice to be appointed
Rogator in the past, asking for an exemption then, but it was denied.
However, he did make the effort, he did seek permission, and I consider
that to be a good faith effort to satisfy the requirements of the Lex.
If he wins the position of Rogator, this would show that the people
clearly desire him to serve in this capacity, and I would vote to
allow it.

He possesses enthusiasm and fortitude. Let us not turn him away a
third time.

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976166771/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 21:30:38 -0800

Ave,

In that case I would vote for the exemption. I know that he has tried at least
3-4 times for the exemption. Thank you for the recollection, M. Octavius.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Marcus Octavius Germanicus wrote:

> Salve Luci Corneli,
>
> > In my personal opinion, to deviate from seeking the
> > exemption first shows contempt to the Senate and the laws of the Republic.
> > Again, this is only my personal opinion. But, I will vote against any
> > exemption from those candidates that failed to seek exemption prior to the
> > announcement of their candidacy.
>
> Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus asked at least twice to be appointed
> Rogator in the past, asking for an exemption then, but it was denied.
> However, he did make the effort, he did seek permission, and I consider
> that to be a good faith effort to satisfy the requirements of the Lex.
> If he wins the position of Rogator, this would show that the people
> clearly desire him to serve in this capacity, and I would vote to
> allow it.
>
> He possesses enthusiasm and fortitude. Let us not turn him away a
> third time.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Curule Aedile, Nova Roma
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976167041/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Piparskegg UllRsson <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 23:40:10 -0600

Salvete!

Fortunatus wrote:

> T Labienus Censoribus Quiritibusque S P D
>
> (excision)
>
> The minimum ages required are:
> 27 for censor or consul
> 25 for praetor or tribunus plebis
> 21 for quaestor, aedile, or any of the Vigintisexviri

> (excision)
>
> Valete

I know its too late to re-announce, but...
I'm old enough to run for Qu�stor twice, with a year to spare.
~(({;-(}

===========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Coves, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
Qu�stor, Dominus Sodalis
My homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
Nova Roma website
http://www.novaroma.org/main.html
Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
http://www.egroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976167616/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 06 Dec 2000 21:42:33 -0800

In Sui Anno X2 +1

Sorry I couldnt resist. ;)

SF

Piparskegg UllRsson wrote:

> Salvete!
>
> Fortunatus wrote:
>
> > T Labienus Censoribus Quiritibusque S P D
> >
> > (excision)
> >
> > The minimum ages required are:
> > 27 for censor or consul
> > 25 for praetor or tribunus plebis
> > 21 for quaestor, aedile, or any of the Vigintisexviri
>
> > (excision)
> >
> > Valete
>
> I know its too late to re-announce, but...
> I'm old enough to run for Qu�stor twice, with a year to spare.
> ~(({;-(}
>
> ===========================================
> In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
> - Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
> Coves, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
> Qu�stor, Dominus Sodalis
> My homestead
> http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
> Nova Roma website
> http://www.novaroma.org/main.html
> Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976167756/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] My Endorsements for Offices
From:	Art McGrath <amcgrath@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 00:43:40 -0500 (EST)

Endorsements

Salvete,

Some citizens have asked me who I support in this election. I hereby
make the following endorsments:

For censor I endorse Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus. He is one of the most
dedidated people to Nova Roma that I know. He has served her as a senior
magistrate, as a Pontiff, a Flamen and as a Senator. He suffered a
severe political setback last year that would have driven a lesser man
to his knees and fostered long-standing bitterness. However, he never
gave up and his dedication to Nova Roma never faltered. In addition, he
is familiar with the job of censor and would need little training. He
heped me last year with censorial work and is helping the current
censor, Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix.
For consul, I endorse the Founders of Nova Roma Marcus Cassius Iulianus
and Flavius Vedius Germanicus. One should not have to choose between the
two Founders of Nova Roma, though with the passage of the new "half a
vote" rule, voters will have to. I leave it up to you to decide which of
the two to vote for. It is a difficult decision and both are excellent
choices.
For Praetor, I endorse Quintus Fabius Maximus, the outgoing Senior
Consul. It is commendable that he is willing to serve in a lower office
after having served in the highest. It shows true dedication to Nova
Roma.
For quaestor, I endorse Patricia Cassia. She has ably-and often
thanklessly-- served in this position since the early days of Nova Roma.
Last year she served as my quaestor during my tenure as Consul. She has
done a great job of keeping our books balanced and helping us to achieve
non-profit status.
Remember, your voice will not be heard if you do not vote. Leave no
hanging chads and only vote for one candidate per office. Unlike some
people, Romans are expected to be able to read and understand the
ballot. Expect no pity.

Valete,

Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus,
Senator, Pontiff
Consul 1999, Censor 1998-1999, Praetor 1998

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Quis ita familiaris est barbaris,
ut aram Victoriae non requirat!"

Quintus Aurelius Symmachus

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976167829/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Piparskegg UllRsson <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:22:20 -0600

Salve Amicus mea,

L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:

> In Sui Anno X2 +1
>
> Sorry I couldnt resist. ;)
>
> SF

Null problema!

In Felicitas - Venii

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976170148/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	RexMarcius@--------
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 03:52:47 EST

Salve Censor Sulla!

With all due respect for your office (which I am myself seeking in this election) and your experience as Praetor urbanus in Nova Roma I am inclined to disagree with you on your interpretation of the respective lex Iunia de Magistratum aetate.

This lex is based on Article IV of the Vedian constitution where it is stipulated that: "IV. Magistrates.......Qualifications necessary to hold (sic!!!) these positions may be enacted by law properly passed by one of the comitia."

With regard to this last sentence the Lex Iunia de magistratum aetate states that for the offices of Censor, Consul, Praetor, Quaestor and Aedile "No person may assume the office..." or in the case of the Vigintisexviri "No person shall assume any office of the Vigintisexviri".

An exception to the law may be granted by senatus consultum (2/3) plus approval by both Censors.

Now, I am not a native English speaker, but to "assume" office is something completely different to "being a candidate" for office.

To show to you what the legislature meant by "assuming" I might point your attention to the Lex Iunia de Iusurando (as shown in the Tabularium). There it is stipulated that: "All magistrates, Propraetors, Senators, etc. are required to take the following oath in a public forum (ie onelist or Nova Roma's message board) before they can assume (sic!!!) office"

Now that makes it absolutely clear to me that one has to be a candidate and elected, or elevated to the Senate or appointed as propraetor etc. first before you can "assume" office. I therefore conclude that in the statutory language of the lex Iunia de magistrate aetatum no binding duty to seek exception for a "candidacy" is included.

Would it make sense to seek approval before becoming a candidate? Yes and no. The Senate and the Censors would have to override the popular vote to keep an elected "youngster", who obviously performed well in his campaign, from taking his office. Therefore, if I were such a "youngster" (which I am not, I am 30 years old), I would ask AFTER my election. Also, it would mean less work for the Senate and the Censors only to address the question of the lex after the election with those who got elected.

On the other hand, as Censor Sulla pointed out, it might well be important to know for the electorate BEFORE the election, if the vote for the candidate will count in the end. But if the personal qualities of this person are so clearly showing, I, as a voter, would certainly believe that the Senate and the Censors would also follow.

Therefore, as the statutory language is unambiguous on this and there is no clear ratio for a teleological reduction by interpretation, I am of the legal opinion that it is NOT necessary to seek an exemption from the lex Iunia de magistratum aretate BEFORE the election.

Marcus Marcius Rex
Candidate for Censor
Senator

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976179177/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma]
From:	"Bradius V. Maurus III" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 03:59:02 -0500

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quirites S.P.D.

In my second Position Paper I presented some thoughts on the
possible structure of a true Nova Roman judiciary, i.e. a court system.
In this third Position Paper I wish to present to the citizenry of Nova
Roma my proposals regarding the basic laws for the protection of the
citizens of Nova Roma and their dignitas, in other words something like
a bill of rights.

Government when good secures many advantages to mankind, but it
can be at the same time the most systematic and powerful oppressor.
Making sure that a society reaps the benefits of government without
suffering from its excesses requires laws and institutions to protect
the individual citizen and all classes of society from arbitrary acts by
the authroities, and to the degree that it successfully does so we may
judge its government truly civilised.

Rome offers a splendid example of this due to the struggle
between the Orders. In ancient Rome the necessity of the plebeians to
protect themselves from and gain and approximate legal equality with the
patricians gave rise very early to a consciousness of the necessity to
protect the weak from the possessors of government power. The creation
of the Tribuni Plebis protected by a sacrosanctity guaranteed by gods
and the watchful people, armed with the power of intercessio and the
right to sit in the Senate and call the people into session in their own
assembly was the outstanding single instution of this. Perhaps no less
important was the right of Provocatio or Appeal to the People, by which
the right of life and death was taken out of the hands of magistrates
and given to the Sovereign People, which judged, and at their pleasure
even pardoned the guilty. Tribunes, too, were empowered to bring
magistrates before the People for trial in cases of malfeasance in
office - especially for breaking the agreements under which the people
were willing to condone patrician magistrates set over . (Of course
rules and custom gradually caused more magistrates to be plebeians too.)

I would here like to talk about the fundamental rights that our
cives here in Nova Roma should enjoy vis-�-vis their magistrates and
government. I do not intend here to propose precise texts, but only the
general classes of provisions that I think should be taken into
consideration.

1. We need a guarantee that all crimes will be judged, and any
punishments levied before a court, whether a Praetor or a Comitia, not
by any other authority.
2. We need a guarantee of criminal trials being before the People in
Comitia not only in cases of potential exile (capital crimes), but in
all in which a magistrate is involved in an alleged crime in his
official capacity, in all when loss of civic rights or disabilites are a
possible result, and in all for which a citizen feels he would be more
justly or mercifully treated by the sovereign People than by a Praetor
acting alone.
3. We need a guarantee that any citizen denied admission or readmission
to citizenship in Nova Roma have a right of Appeal to the People, unless
he or she has been previously exiled or denied admission by a vote of
the People and the term of exile (if one was set) has not yet expired.
The Censors must be required to inform such persons of this right in a
clear and adequate way at the time of denying an application.
4. We need a right of appeal to the Praetors and Tribunes for anyone
moderated or suspended from the list by the Curator Sermonis, if such
person feels it unjust. The right of free speech is extremely important.
Tribunes should be exempt from all interference from the Curatrix as a
part of their sacrosanctity as representatives of the People�s Libertas.
5. We need a guarantee of freedom of association in private
organisations comprised of Nova Romans or a mixture of Nova Romans and
others, including their right to use the Nova Roman Main List for
non-commercial announcements, just as in any free society. They may be
required to avoid the word �Sodalitas" in their names unless they intend
within ninety days of their founding to apply to the Senate for
official registration as Sodalitates of Nova Roma. They might also be
strictly required not to give the impression of representing the Nova
Roman State officially unless they are given some specific commission to
do so by a competent magistrate, the Senate or the People.
6. We need a stronger and clearer affirmation of the provisions in the
Constitution against sexual discrimination. This should include the
right of all citizens to officially use a Nova Roman name having a
gender they individually deem most appropriate for the7m, and an
acceptance of their sexual identity or changes therein as stated on
oath or solemn legal affirmation.
7. We need a clarification that chatrooms and lists not established by
Nova Roma or its Sodalitates are not Nova Roman jurisdiction from the
standpoint of regulating the conduct there of persons who happen to be
Nova Roman citizens.

These principles duely enabled into law would protect us against
many possible and even likely abuses and serve as a cornerstone of a
Nova Roma in which we can all feel secure.

There are other pieces of legislation, of course, which are to
be commended in this regard, including the privacy-protection
legislation of Censor Sulla, and the anti-stalking legislation of Consul
Q. Fabius Maximus. Other legislation against libel and slander - if
well-written and not favouring those in power - will also protect us in
other ways.

*However*, Quirites, be on your guard. The Amici Dignitatis
since even before we were formed has worked to popularise the idea of a
well-ordered judiciary and rule by law. Even those who had had these
ideas previously were restimulated to come out with them again. And I
think we can be very content that we have had this good effect through
our work. Nonetheless, merely having courts and laws in place does not
mean that the actual content of the laws and the actual functioning of
the courts will be such as to protect citizens. Some others probably
have conceptions more akin to establishing their idea of *order* and
*controlling* citizens mroe strictly through laws and courts more than
protecting their rights and dignity.

If, therefore, you agree with me that we consider the protection
and respect for the rights and human dignitas of every Nova Roman the
first priority in building a decent and secure Nova Roma, I personally
implore you to give your votes to the candidates for each office who
have signed the Statements of the Amici Dignitatis. They are all each
and every one deeply committed to this cause. Enough to risk their
political careers in Nova Roma by standing up and taking an initiative
for these things. Please think about it.

M. Apollonius Formosanus
Candidate for Praetor Urbanus of Nova Roma

-----------------------------------------------------
http://eo.yifan.net
Free POP3/Web Email, File Manager, Calendar and Address Book

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976179570/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:55:58 -0800

RexMarcius@-------- wrote:

> Salve Censor Sulla!
>
> With all due respect for your office (which I am myself seeking in this election) and your experience as Praetor urbanus in Nova Roma I am inclined to disagree with you on your interpretation of the respective lex Iunia de Magistratum aetate.
>

Sulla: You have every right to disagree with my opinion. As I stated it was my own personal opinion.

>
> This lex is based on Article IV of the Vedian constitution where it is stipulated that: "IV. Magistrates.......Qualifications necessary to hold (sic!!!) these positions may be enacted by law properly passed by one of the comitia."

>
> With regard to this last sentence the Lex Iunia de magistratum aetate states that for the offices of Censor, Consul, Praetor, Quaestor and Aedile "No person may assume the office..." or in the case of the Vigintisexviri "No person shall assume any office of the Vigintisexviri".
>
> An exception to the law may be granted by senatus consultum (2/3) plus approval by both Censors.
>
> Now, I am not a native English speaker, but to "assume" office is something completely different to "being a candidate" for office.
>
> To show to you what the legislature meant by "assuming" I might point your attention to the Lex Iunia de Iusurando (as shown in the Tabularium). There it is stipulated that: "All magistrates, Propraetors, Senators, etc. are required to take the following oath in a public forum (ie onelist or Nova Roma's message board) before they can assume (sic!!!) office"
>
> Now that makes it absolutely clear to me that one has to be a candidate and elected, or elevated to the Senate or appointed as propraetor etc. first before you can "assume" office. I therefore conclude that in the statutory language of the lex Iunia de magistrate aetatum no binding duty to seek exception for a "candidacy" is included.
>
> Would it make sense to seek approval before becoming a candidate? Yes and no. The Senate and the Censors would have to override the popular vote to keep an elected "youngster", who obviously performed well in his campaign, from taking his office. Therefore, if I were such a "youngster" (which I am not, I am 30 years old), I would ask AFTER my election. Also, it would mean less work for the Senate and the Censors only to address the question of the lex after the election with those who got elected.
>
> On the other hand, as Censor Sulla pointed out, it might well be important to know for the electorate BEFORE the election, if the vote for the candidate will count in the end. But if the personal qualities of this person are so clearly showing, I, as a voter, would certainly believe that the Senate and the Censors would also follow.
>
> Therefore, as the statutory language is unambiguous on this and there is no clear ratio for a teleological reduction by interpretation, I am of the legal opinion that it is NOT necessary to seek an exemption from the lex Iunia de magistratum aretate BEFORE the election.
>

Sulla: Your right there is ambiguity. However, I have taken a fairly strict interpretation given the fact that no one has received any exemption. And those that have tried have not succeeded. I believe that as Censor and a Senator there must be careful consideration by both bodies (the Censors and the Seante). To me it is more respectful of candidates to petition both the Censors and Senate before they announce their candidacy. To me that shows honesty and respect for magistrates who have put in
countless hours and held the office. To me, it reflects on integrity. With that in mind, I tendered my personal opinion. These are the exact things that I told C. Sentius when he came to me when he asked if he should announce his candidacy for Rogator.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976180962/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Postition Paper 2: Towards a Nova Roman Judiciary System
From:	"C. Iulius" <ancientrome@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 01:27:56 -0800

Greetings Nova Romani,

I do hope that my posting in regards to these issues that affect you upsets none of you. I haven't received any responses dictating any compliments nor any complaints. Without further adieu, let me get right on with my thoughts regarding this second proposal.
>
>However, let me note that I am disappointed in you M. Apollonius that you have failed to respond to my comments regarding your first paper. I thought, you of all potential magistrates would have come to value the comments of your peers. Just because I am not a citizen of Nova Roma does not mean I am not a stakeholder. I do hope you will take the time to respond to the comments in the future.
>
>
>M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> Here is my second Position Paper, dedicated to the creation of a complete and adequate judiciary system for Nova Roma. I urge all
>voters wishing to understand what I stand for in Nova Roman politics
>to read these papers. It is these papers that represent my true
>"manifesto", not random comments made elsewhere.
>
>Response: Now, which "manifesto" are you telling the voters to ignore? The dignitas statement? The speech called the Movement? Your first paper?
>
> I wish to repeat that not all of these things are things I could do alone as a Praetor, even with a suitable colleague, but they are changes that a Praetor, being concerned with all things legal and
>judicary by virtue of his office, can collaborate on with others so
>that they might be brought about.
>
>Response: I am glad you mentioned that right off the bat. Because there are Constitutional checks which prohibit a magistrate from usurping too much magisterial power. Even a Sulla has his limits.
>
> I am impressed with the good treatment of this whole sphere in the post by M. Iunius Cassius on the matter. I here am dividing my
>treatment into this paper on the court system and a future one on the
>basic laws we need to protect civil rights.
>
>Response: I think we were all impressed by the statement of M. Cassius Iulianus. It was very well thoughtout and presented. Nova Roma will definitely prosper under his Consulship.
>
> The scandalous treatment of one citizen in the past year served as a wake-up call not just to the Amici Dignitatis, but to many other fair-minded people in Nova Roma. There is a wide-spread feeling that we must have a judicial system to deal with crime, torts and
>punishment in a manner non-political, neutral, consistent, and
>rule-guided.
>
>Response: Oh M. Apollonius, I think you are drawing too much of a conclusion from this. If you are referring strictly to the Senatus Consultum via the reprimand, I would agree. However, if you are referring to everything including the 3 Censor ruling, I must disagree with you. From the ruling of the Censors to the promulgation of the Edict, all magistrates complied with the Constitution of Nova Roma. Even the edicts, which were promulgated, were promulgated legally and each one successfully evaded any Veto. Nor did the Senate overturn the edict. I am sorry, but Constitutional safeguards were completely adequate and in no way were they bypassed. Even the Senate reprimand was based in precedent, granted bad precedent but precedent nevertheless. I think you would have a much STRONGER case, if you decided to have a platform that expressed no more reprimands. However, even to do this means you would have to steal someone else's thunder because I believe, if memory serves!
me correctly, Sulla was the one to say that first.
>
><SNIP>
>
> The first type of court we need is one for criminal matters. If we consider some things such as stalking, malfeasance in office,
>embezzlement, misappropriation of funds, discriminatory treatment of
>citizens, and malicious destruction of NR websites to be real crimes,
>then we must be prepared with suitable courts to deal with them
>appropriately.
>
>Response: Wouldn't embezzlement be nearly the same as the misappropriate of funds? Beyond that I think this is perfectly acceptable. But how will you promulgate a law on this and how will it be enforced?
>
> The Senate is not that court. That is neither historically in
>Republican times nor under the present Constitution a judicial body.
>It has, unfortunately, on two occasions issued "reprimands", which
>are essentially the same as bills of attainder, something
>specifically prohibited in the U.S. Constitution, such a bad
>reputation had such things already acquired long ago. The Senate is
>not judicial but political in nature.
>
>Response: I think we all can agree with that. So basically you are adopting the statement, "No more Senatorial reprimands?"
>
> The Praetors are the principal judicial officers of our Respublica. (Note that in antiquity Consuls shared these functions in criminal law.) But what are they to do if a case is brought before them, and indeed who should have the right to do that?
>
>Response: Are you sure Consuls did share some of those functions? I am not positive, please provide some citiation for that.
>
> Initiation of prosecution in the Roman Republic was normally left to individuals. Following this precedent, we might allow any citizen (with the exception of the praetors themselves) to call anyone into court on a criminal charge. This would ensure that the whole body of citizens would be constant watchdogs for the leges of the Respublica. But each Praetor would be allowed to judge whether or not there were sufficient grounds to warrant a trial.
>
>Response: This sounds nice and neat on paper. But, we all know that life is much more complicated than that. What about rules of evidence? Discovery? And, lets not forget due Process?
>
> If a trial were approved by either Praetor, we might permit him or her to investigate and pass sentence alone according to suitable rules to ensure fairness if the matter were not serious. Or if the crime were of extraordinary gravity - I should say if it involved the possibility of exile (our equivalent of a capital crime), or if it touched a magistrate or senator in his or her official capacity, or if the defendent requested it -, we should send it directly and automatically to the People. (Traditionally the Praetor himself would not handle this in person if provocatio were to be involved. Since our Praetors need more work and we are a small commuunity so far, I would suggest not using other officials for this job to avoid unnecessary complication at this stage of our development.)
>
>Response: I believe that is already the case, M. Apollonius, (III, B, 3) already declares that the Comitia Centuriata will be the venue to try legal cases in which the defendant is subject to permanent removal of citizenship.
>
><SNIP>
>
> I believe that there must be a special place, as in Roma Antiqua, for iurisconsulti, specialists in Roman and Nova Roman legal matters. One thinks of Scaevola Magister, Marcius Rex, and Prius Fabius as some obvious candidates for such a panal who could advise all legal officers.
>
>Response: Personally, I prefer the idea of Sulla's in creating a law sodalities. In that way, anyone would be able to ask for the advice and opinions of various legal experts. While I am not currently on the law list, I believe that its formulation can only help with this process. Another reason I feel that a panel would not be proper is because of the lack of authority. It just is not Roman. A Sodlitias where anyone can join, observer, and participate has tradition and precedent behind it.
>
> In my following Position Paper I shall present my ideas for a
>minimum set of basic legal protections for the dignitas of every
>civis.
>
>Response: I am looking forward to it.
>
>C. Iulius
>*An interested observer*

------------------------------------------------------------
DAILY NEWS @ http://www.PhilosophyNews.com
FREE EMAIL @ http://www.Philosophers.net

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976181278/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] M. Apollonius's Paper P. 3
From:	"C. Iulius" <ancientrome@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 01:58:59 -0800

Greetings Nova Romani,

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quirites S.P.D.

In my second Position Paper I presented some thoughts on the
possible structure of a true Nova Roman judiciary, i.e. a court system.
In this third Position Paper I wish to present to the citizenry of Nova
Roma my proposals regarding the basic laws for the protection of the
citizens of Nova Roma and their dignitas, in other words something like
a bill of rights.

Response: I am curious, just how Roman is a bill of rights? Just how far do you intend to implement modern philosophical ideas and grate them into the stem of Nova Roma�s Roman background. Your entire platform to date contains so much modern governmental philosophy that if you were successful in implementation, Nova Roma would be primarily a modern country with trappings of Ancient Roman background. It is for that very reason that I am concerned. It would show to me and other observers that the grand experiment that is Nova Roma has failed. And, that the systems of modern government have morphed it into some creature that is one, unrecognizable to scholars and historians and two betrays the foundation of what Nova Roma is trying to achieve.

Government when good secures many advantages to mankind, but it
can be at the same time the most systematic and powerful oppressor.
Making sure that a society reaps the benefits of government without
suffering from its excesses requires laws and institutions to protect
the individual citizen and all classes of society from arbitrary acts by
the authroities, and to the degree that it successfully does so we may
judge its government truly civilised.

Response: Who is the judge of good government? You? Or those magistrates who already have the Constitutional authority, and elected by the People. Personally, with all the animosity you have contributed, M. Apollonius, I have a feeling that you feel you are the sole judge, jury and executioner. I think many of the problems that you keep pressing the issue on are strictly issues because you have failed to compromise. Compromise is a very big issue when it comes to politics. And in that you have failed. In every one of your speeches and papers you have mentioned or alluded to the one person who you feel was abused. I wonder if you are going to mention that subject in this paper as well.

I would here like to talk about the fundamental rights that our
cives here in Nova Roma should enjoy vis-�-vis their magistrates and
government. I do not intend here to propose precise texts, but only the
general classes of provisions that I think should be taken into
consideration.

1. We need a guarantee that all crimes will be judged, and any
punishments levied before a court, whether a Praetor or a Comitia, not
by any other authority.

Response: I don�t have a problem with this.

2. We need a guarantee of criminal trials being before the People in
Comitia not only in cases of potential exile (capital crimes), but in
all in which a magistrate is involved in an alleged crime in his
official capacity, in all when loss of civic rights or disabilites are a
possible result, and in all for which a citizen feels he would be more
justly or mercifully treated by the sovereign People than by a Praetor
acting alone.

Response: This has already been in the Constitution, under the Comitia Centuriatia. You might want to read that.

3. We need a guarantee that any citizen denied admission or readmission
to citizenship in Nova Roma have a right of Appeal to the People, unless
he or she has been previously exiled or denied admission by a vote of
the People and the term of exile (if one was set) has not yet expired.
The Censors must be required to inform such persons of this right in a
clear and adequate way at the time of denying an application.

Response: Basically you want to give non-citizens rights in Nova Roma? I have a question for you, what macronation gives rights to non-citizens? Beyond that, I think you should stipulate a time frame for appeals to the Comitia.

4. We need a right of appeal to the Praetors and Tribunes for anyone
moderated or suspended from the list by the Curator Sermonis, if such
person feels it unjust. The right of free speech is extremely important.
Tribunes should be exempt from all interference from the Curatrix as a
part of their sacrosanctity as representatives of the People�s Libertas.

Response: I am sorry, but I disagree. Once again, in ancient Rome did people have the right to free speech. M. Apollonius, I believe you are trying to implement too many modern concessions to Nova Roma. Besides, wouldn�t this basically eliminate the list moderator�s powers. When you have an email list there must be some moderation in the event that parties debating do not get out of control. Or do you not see a need for that?

5. We need a guarantee of freedom of association in private
organisations comprised of Nova Romans or a mixture of Nova Romans and
others, including their right to use the Nova Roman Main List for
non-commercial announcements, just as in any free society. They may be
required to avoid the word �Sodalitas" in their names unless they intend
within ninety days of their founding to apply to the Senate for
official registration as Sodalitates of Nova Roma. They might also be
strictly required not to give the impression of representing the Nova
Roman State officially unless they are given some specific commission to
do so by a competent magistrate, the Senate or the People.

Response: I think this is already the norm, from my observation from the Nova Roma email list, this is how it has always functioned.

6. We need a stronger and clearer affirmation of the provisions in the
Constitution against sexual discrimination. This should include the
right of all citizens to officially use a Nova Roman name having a
gender they individually deem most appropriate for the7m, and an
acceptance of their sexual identity or changes therein as stated on
oath or solemn legal affirmation.

Response: See, I knew it. You would mention your cornerstone. I believe that you are wrong in this matter. The name change edict that was promulgated by the Censors are perfectly adequate and even utilize your own recommendations. To expect more from them will question the viability of Nova Roma as a nation.

7. We need a clarification that chatrooms and lists not established by
Nova Roma or its Sodalitates are not Nova Roman jurisdiction from the
standpoint of regulating the conduct there of persons who happen to be
Nova Roman citizens.

Response: Why?

<SNIP>

*However*, Quirites, be on your guard. The Amici Dignitatis
since even before we were formed has worked to popularise the idea of a
well-ordered judiciary and rule by law. Even those who had had these
ideas previously were restimulated to come out with them again. And I
think we can be very content that we have had this good effect through
our work. Nonetheless, merely having courts and laws in place does not
mean that the actual content of the laws and the actual functioning of
the courts will be such as to protect citizens. Some others probably
have conceptions more akin to establishing their idea of *order* and
*controlling* citizens mroe strictly through laws and courts more than
protecting their rights and dignity.

Response: I believe there is sufficient doubt that the Amici Dignitatis is not a cohesive core. Your own words have come to haunt those candidates in this election. I believe that many of them are much more moderate than you are in the pursuit of your own personal agenda. So far, the agendas you have proposed are either totally unenforceable or very unlikely to even see the light of day. Besides that, you have alienated those in a position to assist you. If you were elected, I do not believe that you will even accomplish even 10% of your agenda, your tweaking and fine-tuning would essential create a Constitutional crises or worse a total rewrite of the Constitution and a complete change from the stated mission of Nova Roma.

<Snip>

C. Iulius
*An interested observer*

------------------------------------------------------------
DAILY NEWS @ http://www.PhilosophyNews.com
FREE EMAIL @ http://www.Philosophers.net

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976183140/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Invitation to Saturnalia!!!
From:	<gmvick32@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 03:07:08 -0700

Salvete, Quirities!

It is with great pleasure that I divert from the political
matters at hand, to invite all Nova Romans to a virtual
Saturnalia gathering on Sunday, December 17th.

Please join us in the Taverna to tip the Falernian in
celebration of the beginning of Saturnalia starting anytime
after:

10 p.m. Rome time (GMT+1)
9 p.m. Britain time
4 p.m. US East Coast time
2 p.m. US Mountain zone time
1 p.m. California time

This virtual Saturnalia gathering will overlap with a house
party at my home in Denver, Colorado to perform a Saturnalia
ritual and have a Roman feast. Others also have Saturnalia
rituals in the planning for this day.

If you happen to be near Denver on the 17th, you would be
welcome to attend our live party. Please email me
privately for more details.

Vale,
Livia Cornelia Aurelia
Propraetrix, America Austroccidentalis

[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/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976183259/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"Jeroen Meuleman" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:17:41 +0100

Salve Rex et Luci,

<big big snip>

> Sulla: Your right there is ambiguity. However, I have taken a fairly
strict interpretation given the fact that no one has received any exemption.
And those that have tried have not succeeded. I believe that as Censor and
a Senator there must be careful consideration by both bodies (the Censors
and the Seante). To me it is more respectful of candidates to petition both
the Censors and Senate before they announce their candidacy. To me that
shows honesty and respect for magistrates who have put in
> countless hours and held the office. To me, it reflects on integrity.
With that in mind, I tendered my personal opinion. These are the exact
things that I told C. Sentius when he came to me when he asked if he should
announce his candidacy for Rogator.

--- Being one of the persons in casu here seeking an exemption from that
lex, I must say I agree with the things Rex has said. The exemption is to be
granted after the election, not before it. In my opinion there is plenty of
time for debating the issue of an exemption after the elections are over.
F.y.i., I did inform the Senate and the Censores (whom you are presenting
here as seperate bodies, while the Censores are also Senatores) before
announcing my candidacy, and no one responded. Also, several Senatores are
aware of I draft I made that should amend the Lex Iunia, so I'm not exactly
sitting around here, waiting to usurp power :-).

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous fran�ais? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976191607/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Electiions
From:	"L. Tiberius Sardonicus" <sardonicus_@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 07:58:52 -0500

Salvete Citizens of Nova Roma,

As I'm sure you are well aware, the elections are upon us. As we stand in
the time when some of us will take leave of their official duties, when some
will change duties and others await the call of the people to begin new
duties, I would gently remind the people of Nova Roma of their duty to vote.

Voting to elect our magistrates is a benefit, a privilege, and a right of
Citizenship. In my humble opinion, the three Virtues that should be
foremost in the hearts and minds of the people at the time of election are
Dignitas, Gravitas and Pietas. Voting is evidence of self-worth and
personal pride. It projects a sense of the importance of the matter at
hand, responsibility and earnestness. It shows a respect for the ideals of
patriotism and devotion to others. Therefore, I believe voting is a civic
duty. Complete the cycle of civic participation. Choose well. Vote.

Di Te Bene Ament,
L. Tiberius Sardonicus

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976193933/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 13:03:54 -0000

> to "assume" office is something completely different to "being a candidate" for office.

I must say I'm with Marcius on this one. As a Senator, I have resisted
voting for exemptions (even in the case of such obviously qualified
young people as we have before us), because it wasn't clear to me that
we needed to make these exemptions. In other words, I would not vote
for an exemption if there were a qualified candidate for the job who
WAS of age.

If a candidate has been chosen by the Comitia, then I think I would be
more likely to approve their choice in the Senate.

P. Cassia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976194245/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] For the "Cursus Honorum - a new lex"!
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:49:15 +0100

Salve Quintiliane,

> Sulla:
> >> No one has stated we SHOULD have a legislated Cursus Honorum. I was
> >> responding to Sextus Apollonius's comments about a "what if" scenario
if a
> >> deranged Censor got into that office and started publishing Edicta.
>
> Apollonius:
> >My idea was not to legislate the Cursus Honorum, and I'm still against
it,
> >although requesting a potential Censor to have at least filled the
position
> >of Praetor, Consul or provincial governor at least once would be a good
idea
> >I think.

>
> I think there are quite few advantages with a "Cursus Honorum Lex"
> 1. It will be easier to recruit to the lower levels, now it seems as if
not
> many want to work on the lower levels.
> 2. The officials on higher levels will be more experienced.
> 3. All officials will have experience from all "fields" in the end.
> 4. The populus will have longer time to see what the candidates will do in
> practice.
> 5. Officials have had longer time to learn to know others at higher levels
> before they get that responsability themselfs.
> 6. The law proposal has enough exceptions built into it to make it work
now
> in the beginning of Nova Roma's existence.
>
> Maybe there are more arguments for? Are there arguments against?
>
> Why should we not legislate, illustrous Censor Sulla? Dear Apollonius,
your
> idea of being a Praetor, Consul or govenor before becomming a Censor is
> just a variant of my law proposal, or ...

I don't see it as a variant, as much as a bike is a variant of a car.
However, although you bring up some pretty valid arguments, I'd have to note
a few things. Not everyone who loves Roman politics is interested in
finances / laws, so why have every politician be a quaestor for a year when
they aren't interested in becoming one? True enough, sacrifices and efforts
must be made in order to obtain something one wants, but I don't see that if
someone is not interested in financial politics and makes a bad quaestor,
should be automatically portrayed as a bad consul, too. In my opinion
legislating a Cursus Honorum would hold a grip too tight on us, and we would
begin to lack candidates for some offices. Especially taken in account that
we only have 600 citizens, of whom half have this digest.

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous fran�ais? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976194709/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] My Thoughts on the Amici Dignitatis
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:54:34 +0100

Salve Aeternia,

> These are just my opinions and I will hope everyone will understand, I am
not
> trying to offend nor insult anyone. From what I have gathered from the
whole
> Amici Dignitatis, are two things.

No need to walk on eggshells with me.

> 1. The Amici Dignitatis, the egroups list that is. Is a list created for
> those who want to discuss and enjoy polictically structured discussions.

Actually its name is the Dignitas Forum. Minor nitpickery :-).

> 2. The Amici Dignitatis, the Non-Partisan group.
>
> I was invited to sign the statement that was sent around, at the time I
> simply ignored
> it. Now why did I ignore it? First off something about the statement
didn't
> feel so cozy,
> and secondly I'm not into politics enough to join. I enjoy politics from a
> close spectator's view.
>
> Marcus Apollonius Formosanus and the rest of this non-partisan group, I
will
> say this much to you. (No one take offense please) I will not call you
> 'Athenian Demagougues nor will I say you bring 'Apocalyptic doom' to
everyone
> you breathe on. I don't find you
> evil at all. What I am trying to say is, even for no one who isn't into
> politics, I do sense
> some decisive differences. Now I will not accuse you all of having
personal
> riffs, internal conflicts or nasty squabbles within your group. I am
asking
> all of you, who
> belong to the non-partisan group already, when Formosanus asks the
citizens
> of Nova Roma to sign this statement. Do you want the newcomers to think
> everything is hunky dori when the group really isn't? A very wise person
once
> told me, in order for a group to truly work, compromises must be made. And
> omnes if you really want to be
> considered seriously, perhaps swallowing the pride pill and eating some
> humble pie is necessary.

Your assumption here is kind of wrong. We are friends (amici) who share the
same ethical platform (dignitas). We are not a party with a tight structure.
Also, the statement, as I have said here before, is not that of Formosanus,
but Piscinus', and he did not ask to sign it - I did, because I am the one
that posted it. I really don't like that Formosanus is being demonized here
as some sort of leftist terrorist who is even an outcast among his own
friends and gens. I can assure you that this is not true. If we are a group
of democratic friends, we have the democratic right to disagree with each
other in a civil way, even in public.

<snip>

Vale optime,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous fran�ais? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--
>
>
>
>
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976194710/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Class Conlfict
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:05:55 +0100

Salve Australice,

> This thing about always claiming others are losing their tempers seems to
> be a favorite theme of yours. Is this how the Apollonii conduct debates?
> Grab one fantasy theme and keep repeating it unendingly in the
> supposition that eventually others will believe it's true?

Repeating a fantasy theme? I may hope not! You are right that I have said
before that if you drag emotions into debates, you lose. I wasn't wanting to
sound as though I was threatening you, it was just a small piece of advice
from my own limited experience. And so far it has proven true, so it's not a
dogma printed into my brain as a fantasy theme. As for your accusation of
the Apollonii conducting debates in the same manner, I see no way why this
would be so, as none of my fellow gentiles and I share a common education or
ancestor.

> >*blinks in amazement*. We have different classes, you know. That word
> >implies that there are differences. Although they are not large
differences,
> >as I admit, there are some, as has been pointed out here recently.

> Your amazement suggests how out of touch your group really is - there are
> no classes here. If you refer to the purely symbolic, cosmetic assignment
> of "patrician" and "plebian," you have to be really fantasizing to make
> that into any kind of "class difference."

I said that the difference was minor, and I don't think worth debating.
However, as you insist, here are two differences: only Plebeians can elect
or become Tribuni Plebis, and Patricians have more Century points than
Plebeians. I'm not fantasizing.

> >We have been accused of being Athenian reconstructionists, political
fashion
> >butterflies, and destroyers of Nova Roma. You are one of those people who
> >have accused the AD in this manner. I can look up the posts if you want
me
> >to.

> I don't know that I ever advised others not to vote for anyone, mainly
> because I don't think it necessary to do so. Those who seek to undermine
> Nova Roma in a fit of pique because they can't have everything their own
> self-righteous way have given the voters of Nova Roma quite enough basis
> on which to decide for themselves for whom to vote.

You indeed never advised people not to vote for us, but that was not what I
was saying. And even though you're not litterally saying it, you're implying
it. Not fantasy. Any reasonable man would see the disapproval in your
words - and disagree with us you may, as much as you want. But I would come
armed with solid proof first, if I were you.

> >So are you. And I.

> And your point is...? Vado was trying to make himself out to be a part of
> an unheard minority, when the reality is he is one of the "Dominators of
> Discourse" here. (A bit of hyperbole there - don't get bent out of shape
> and post six more messages about it.)

Yes, you're correct. And I better won't react to that last (strategically
placed) phrase, will I? ;-).

> >I'd advise you to cool down for a while. If you lose your temper, you
lose
> >the game. And there's too much at stake.
>
> Nothing like a computer to let you quote out of context and assign your
> own interpretation, eh Draco? Tell us all, please, what's at stake in
> your view. You say that your faction isn't actually seeking to overthrow
> the Republic or to make any drastic changes or to wreak any kind of mad
> vengeance, so what are the big stakes to which you refer here?

Your stakes. The Praetorship. If I did rip your words out of their context,
and falsesly accused you of getting too hot-tempered here, then I apologize
because it was never meant this way. But to what context would you assign
your words then?

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous fran�ais? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976194712/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 04:48:19 -0800

"pjane@--------" wrote:

> > to "assume" office is something completely different to "being a candidate" for office.
>
> I must say I'm with Marcius on this one. As a Senator, I have resisted
> voting for exemptions (even in the case of such obviously qualified
> young people as we have before us), because it wasn't clear to me that
> we needed to make these exemptions. In other words, I would not vote
> for an exemption if there were a qualified candidate for the job who
> WAS of age.
>
> If a candidate has been chosen by the Comitia, then I think I would be
> more likely to approve their choice in the Senate.

Ave,

I disagree on the grounds of Article 5 of the Constitution of Nova Roma that states that the
Senate is the supreme policy making body of Nova Roma. Not the People. In that case, I
believe that you are aborgating the Senate's discretion in this important aspect. What if
the People elect someone not responsible enough. First off, I agree, that each case must be
weighed individually. But, when I advisded C. Sentius, I advisded him how I would do
it...with careful discretion and utmost respect to the Senate and the Censors. I think that
how one presents their petition is equally important as the petition itself....Case in
point. If one just said...I am running for office without qualifications and did not CC: the
Senate...I believe that will look bad. Case in point, Consul Audens initial reaction to C.
Sentius's post asking for the dispensation. And with that information I will vote
accordingly. Whereas in the case of C. Sentius, he sent his petition directly to the Seante
and Censors before he announced his candidacy. As a result of that, and the endorsement of a
number of Senators he is now a Rogator Scribe.

I am sorry we all disagree on this but as I said this is my personal opinion on the matter.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976195026/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate]
From:	dougies@--------
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 13:20:31 -0000

Ave quirites et pater conscripti,

I must say that I have to disagree with P. Cassia on this point.
People who know me
know that I'm not usually vocal on the list (the gods know you've
already got a flow of
e-mails), but I couldn't help but post my feelings on this.

I have to ask some questions of P. Cassia...If we allow people to
constantly run below
age, because they have the approval of the comitia, with the
expectation that they will be
given a dispensation with the backing of the comitia, why do we have
an age law? Why
are those who apply for it (showing due respect and observance of
senate proceedure)
being refused, while those who flaunt its authority are given that
body's approval? Are you
honestly saying that you feel it is better to go against the rights
and perogatives of this
august body?

I am not accusing, I don't mean to be insulting or patronizing, simply
asking questions with
what facts are presented to me. Hope you understand.

Valete bene,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

"pjane@--------" wrote:

> > to "assume" office is something completely different to "being a
candidate" for
office.
>
> I must say I'm with Marcius on this one. As a Senator, I have
resisted
> voting for exemptions (even in the case of such obviously
qualified
> young people as we have before us), because it wasn't clear to me
that
> we needed to make these exemptions. In other words, I would not
vote
> for an exemption if there were a qualified candidate for the job
who
> WAS of age.
>
> If a candidate has been chosen by the Comitia, then I think I
would be
> more likely to approve their choice in the Senate.
>
> P. Cassia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976195234/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] About the Office of Praetor
From:	"Caius Flavius Diocletianus" <3s@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:32:21 +0100

Salvete, Quirites.

As candidate for Praetor, I want to express my view about the tasks of a
Praetor clearly.

According to Chapter IV.A.3.b of our Constitution, the Praetors "...shall
have following honors, powers and obligations:

...to issue those edicta (edicts) necessary to engage in those tasks which
advance the mission and function of Nova Roma and to administer the law
(such edicts being binding upon themselves as well as others);"

To issue edicta to engage those tasks which advance the mission and function
of Nova Roma...:
Of course, this is a unconcrete paragraph. One can interpret many in these
words. The Praetors are in many ways the proxies of the Consuls (compare
Chapter IV.A.2 of the Constitution with Chapter IV.A.3.b).
Because the Consuls have the same power, the power of the Consuls has
priority over the respective power of the Praetors. For me, only the Consuls
have the right to formulate the main guidelines of executive policy, binding
themself and the others. Remember, the Consuls are the Co-Chief Executive
Officers of Nova Roma, not the Praetors. Only when the Consuls are
unavailable, the Praetors have the authority to act instead of the them.
It�s improbable that both Consuls are unavailable at the same time. A
Praetor cannot act against the Consuls without provocing an intercessio. The
authority of the Praetors has it�s limits by the authority of the Consuls.

To issue edicta to ...administer the law:
This is the main task of the Praetors. They are mainly law administrators,
no more, no less. And this would be the focal point of my work as Praetor.
Administration of law means not to initiate new laws, but to handle
exisiting laws or make them more handable. For this the Praetors have the
instrument of edictum. They have to use this instrument properly, under the
highest legal authority, the Constitution. A Praetor can develope guidelines
or interpretations for the use of existing law, he can also try to give the
citizens better access to the laws. He also can establish a collection of
commentaries about the existing laws, make the use of law easier for the
future. He�s not allowed to change laws, of course.

These points show that the job of a Praetor is a mainly administrative one.
As a professional Administrator in my real-life job, I can make this job
well, because of my 10-years experiences in using and interpreting municipal
and state law in cooperation with the (political) city�s council and various
state agencies, and in writing municipal law bills for the city�s council.

The Praetors have the power of intercessio. For me, this power is mainly an
emergency measure. I would try to find a compromise with my collega to
prevent such a veto.

To bring it on the point: The Praetors should act as administrators. This is
the way I will act if I would be elected.

Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Candidate for Praetor Urbanus
www.diocletian.de/elect/diocletianus/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976195980/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] ante diem VII Idus December
From:	razenna@--------
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 13:51:23 -0000

7 DEC 00

Ave Neptunus, conservis nos.
Ave Mars Ultor protegis nos.
Ita est.

C. Aelius Ericius.
[Sepia Senix.]

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976197090/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Pro Tullius Cicero
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:06:19 -0800

Salvete Quirites

Today, 7 Dec., marks the 2710th anniversary of the execution of Cicero
by agentes of Marc Antonius. I offer some of Cicero's words that we may
remember him by.

Ubi tyrannus est, ibi plane est nulla res publica.
Where there is tyrany, plainly there is no republic.

Ut sementem feceris, ita metes.
As you sow, so shall you reap (De oratore).

Pauci viri veros amicos habent, et pauci sunt digni.
Few men have true friends, and fewer still are worthy of them.

Obsequium parit amicus; veritas parit odium.
Compliance makes you his friend; truth wins you his hate.

Epistula non erubescit.
A letter does not blush.

Dicebat ille miser, "Civis Pomanus sum."
This poor man said only, "I am a citizen of Rome."

Curate ut valeatis.
Moravius Piscinus
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976197507/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Pro Tullius Cicero
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 05:38:25 -0800

Ave,

Thank you for posting that. Its very nice. Cicero too was a great and flawed
man. We must view the past with detachment. Lest we forget that, Cicero executed
Roman Citizens without trial. While his letters are beautiful, knowledgable, we
must remember that words are just that. Actions also speak and they speak louder
than words too. Especially in Nova Roma, where we have mainly words to go by, we
must look at the actions of our citizens, magistrates and candidates for office.
As, late President John Kennedy stated so eloquently, "...Ask not what your
country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!"

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

Gian G Reali wrote:

> Salvete Quirites
>
> Today, 7 Dec., marks the 2710th anniversary of the execution of Cicero
> by agentes of Marc Antonius. I offer some of Cicero's words that we may
> remember him by.
>
> Ubi tyrannus est, ibi plane est nulla res publica.
> Where there is tyrany, plainly there is no republic.
>
> Ut sementem feceris, ita metes.
> As you sow, so shall you reap (De oratore).
>
> Pauci viri veros amicos habent, et pauci sunt digni.
> Few men have true friends, and fewer still are worthy of them.
>
> Obsequium parit amicus; veritas parit odium.
> Compliance makes you his friend; truth wins you his hate.
>
> Epistula non erubescit.
> A letter does not blush.
>
> Dicebat ille miser, "Civis Pomanus sum."
> This poor man said only, "I am a citizen of Rome."
>
> Curate ut valeatis.
> Moravius Piscinus
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976197974/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Informal chat - 12/7 - Marcus Cassius Julianus
From:	cassius622@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:07:08 EST

Salvete,

I just wanted to post that I'll be in the Nova Roma chatroom tonight, (12/7)
from 8 PM to 9 PM, EST. I'll be happy to answer questions about my candidacy
for Consul of course, but mostly it'd just be nice to spend some "live" time
with other Citizens.

The difference between US time and European time is unfortunate, since I know
this time is too late for some folks to attend even if they'd like to. I'll
try to arrange some time on Saturday (12/8) earlier in the day, so that there
is a possibility of more folks being around to talk.

Again, this is strictly informal stuff. I've tried going into the live chat a
few times over the past week, and seem to be missing people by ten or fifteen
minutes. Maybe setting a chat time on the main list will help solve that
problem!

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus
Candidate for Consul

[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/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976198039/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Double Voting?
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:17:22 -0600

My name is Aurelia Sertoria and I have a problem. I was showing my father-in-law how to vote by revisiting the Cista and after filling out my choices for a second time for his benefit, I pressed the submit bottom and I voted for a second time! I even got another confirmation number! My question is, did I vote twice, or did I not, and, by doing this did I spoil my vote?

Thank You

Aurelia Sertoria

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

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976202974/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] For the "Cursus Honorum - a new lex"!
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:59:07 -0200 (BRST)

On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, S. Apollonius Draco wrote:

> Salve Quintiliane,
>
> > Sulla:
> > >> No one has stated we SHOULD have a legislated Cursus Honorum. I was
> > >> responding to Sextus Apollonius's comments about a "what if" scenario
> if a
> > >> deranged Censor got into that office and started publishing Edicta.
> >
> > Apollonius:
> > >My idea was not to legislate the Cursus Honorum, and I'm still against
> it,
> > >although requesting a potential Censor to have at least filled the
> position
> > >of Praetor, Consul or provincial governor at least once would be a good
> idea
> > >I think.
>
> >
> > I think there are quite few advantages with a "Cursus Honorum Lex"
> > 1. It will be easier to recruit to the lower levels, now it seems as if
> not
> > many want to work on the lower levels.
> > 2. The officials on higher levels will be more experienced.
> > 3. All officials will have experience from all "fields" in the end.
> > 4. The populus will have longer time to see what the candidates will do in
> > practice.
> > 5. Officials have had longer time to learn to know others at higher levels
> > before they get that responsability themselfs.
> > 6. The law proposal has enough exceptions built into it to make it work
> now
> > in the beginning of Nova Roma's existence.
> >
> > Maybe there are more arguments for? Are there arguments against?
> >
> > Why should we not legislate, illustrous Censor Sulla? Dear Apollonius,
> your
> > idea of being a Praetor, Consul or govenor before becomming a Censor is
> > just a variant of my law proposal, or ...
>
> I don't see it as a variant, as much as a bike is a variant of a car.
> However, although you bring up some pretty valid arguments, I'd have to note
> a few things. Not everyone who loves Roman politics is interested in
> finances / laws, so why have every politician be a quaestor for a year when
> they aren't interested in becoming one? True enough, sacrifices and efforts
> must be made in order to obtain something one wants, but I don't see that if
> someone is not interested in financial politics and makes a bad quaestor,
> should be automatically portrayed as a bad consul, too. In my opinion
> legislating a Cursus Honorum would hold a grip too tight on us, and we would
> begin to lack candidates for some offices. Especially taken in account that
> we only have 600 citizens, of whom half have this digest.

The idea behind it is that a Consul has all powers:
Financial, Administrative and Judicial. Since he has all powers it is best
for him to _learn_ by occupying the lower steps with only one power at a
time.
He will learn with his accesors (truly specialized)

I don t feel that the order between Aedile, Quaestor and Praetor is
important, but all should be occupied before becoming a Consul.
And Consulship should be necessary for becoming a Censor.

Just an opinion.

M' Villius Limitanus

>
> Vale bene,
> Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
> << PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
> Legatus Galliae Borealis,
> Procurator Galliae,
> Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
> --**--
> There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
> --**--
> Novaromain? Parlez-vous fran�ais? Cliquez ici!:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
> Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
> Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
> --**--
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Pr. Michel Loos | Phone: 55 11 818 3810 p. 216
Inst. de Quimica USP | Fax: 55 11 815 5579
PO Box 26077 05599-970 S�o Paulo, S SP
Brazil

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976205324/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] My Ideal Work / Roman Games
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:12:01 -0500 (EST)

Salve, Paul;

Well, I must say that was a very nice response which will always get a
further response from me. I thank you. Let me first comment that Roman
Vessels were copied from the Greeks, Phoenicians and Carthiginians. To
the extent that the Roman Navy retained officer position names in the
original language in some cases. If there would have been an expedition
to the New World, it would probably have been commanded by a Greek Naval
Type with a Roman Pro-Consul, in over-all command, along for the ride.
Not only that, but the fears, legends, and stories about what lay over
the horizon to the West, were enough to freeze your blood. I must
remind you that during this time a simple Legionaire very often gave a
precious portion of his wine and bread in offering to appease the River
Trolls under a given bridge over which he was passing. Imagine the
thoughts of the Sailors in such a voyage---far worse than the outright
mutinies encountered by The Admiral of the Ocean Sea (Columbus) on his
first exploration of the new world!

By the way, there is a gentleman in Mexico who says he has strong
evidence that a Roman Ship or Exploration Party did reach the shores of
the New World. Some of his assertions and evidence, cannot be explained
by emminent experts in the related individual fields of archaeology to
date, and the declaration has spawned fiction stories of this
possibility which provide interesting reading to one devoted to
historical possibilty.

In relation to my ideal job, I think from my background in this century,
my ideal job would have begun in the Roman Navy as a "Gubernator"
(pilot) on a Roman Naval Vessel. This was the person who was
responsible for getting the ship from Point A to Point B, the Captain
being that person who actually designated what those points should be.
The highest goal that I would have aspired to would have been a Fleet
Captain, who was the "Chief Of Staff," if you will, of the Fleet
Commander. This Officer saw to the day to day smooth operation of the
fleet, was the senior commanding officer in the fleet, and the path
through which all communication from lesser officers came to the Fleet
Commander. He was the Senior Navigating Officer for the Fleet, and was
also the second in Command to the Fleet Commander should he be wounded
or klled in battle.

My reasons for this particular selection is that I do my best work as an
Adjutant or as a Staff Officer to a Military Commander in some venue. I
am wedded to the Military by experience and activity, and to the Sea by
fascnation and long-term association, and even in this Autumn of my life
I am hypnotized by the ocean's power, majesty and beauty. I have sailed
upon the sea in everything from a small single-handed sloop, to a
thundering, sleek Man-Of-War, fast patrol boats, submarines, great
liners, sleek destroyers, and great majestic Aircraft Carriers. I have
trod the decks of battleships, both modern and ancient and have known
the sway of the masts of the loviest of the water craft, the
"down-easter" of the clipper merchant marine. Those then, are my ideals
and my reasons for my "dream job" in the Roman Imperial Service.

In regard to the Roman Games, I am not much of a viewer of arena games.
I do not indulge in modern day basketball, football or baseball, nor do
I have any interest in any of the teams, games or series played by them.
I have a mild interest in the Olympics, usually having to do with water
sports and shooting only. My view of the Roman Games is that they
should be limited to decent entertainment on a smaller scale, without
blood sports of any kind. The money thereby saved, should have been
devoted to establishing throughout the Empire a set of standards to
assist the mechanic, the small merchant, and the small farmer to improve
thier lot in life, to become more prosporous, and thus convert the
idleness and insanity over the demand for more and more blood in the
arena, into a more productive work force for the empire. The idea of a
better control of the Mediterranean would have done just that for the
sea-faring groups of citizens. I understand that such is a far reach,
but you have asked for ideals without limit to practicality or to
historic ideals.

Vale, Respectfully;
Marcus Minucius Audens
Consul et Senator
and
Gubernator (pilot), and Agriminsores (surveyor, map-maker), and
Architecturas Navale (master ship builder)

Added Note:--

"A wet sheet and a flowing sea, and a wind that follows fast; and fills
the white and rustling sail and bends the gallant mast.

And bends the gallant mast my boys, while like the Eagle free, our ship
flies and leaves, Old England on our lee!!"

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976205527/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] My Thoughts on the Amici Dignitatis
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:42:11 EST

Salvete,

Forgive my ignorance, Draco you are correct about one thing, they were my
assumptions. I offer you the chance to explain to me in a clarifying way,
exactly
what I am assuming wrong. And as for demonizing your Pater, if I am forgive
me, I had
no intention of doing so, I'm still learning just as you are.

Valete
Aeternia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976207340/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Invitatio
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:47:23 -0500 (EST)

Salve, Citizen Draco;

I thank you for your most kind invitation to join the list (NR Dignatus
Forum) that you mention. As I said to Citizen Formosanus, I would
welcome a formal invitation to review the list and to see for myself
what advantages to Nova Roma such a list may hold. Please add my name
to the list as a Temporary Reviewer, until such time as I shall decide
whether or not to continue on a Permanent Basis.

I additionally appreciate your understanding about the pressing matters
of the Consulship in regards to the proposd Lex we were discussing. I
ask if I lapse too long that you will remind me to continue our
interesting discussions.

Vale, Respectfully;
Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976211245/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:00:45 US/Central

Salvete

C Aelius accidentally sent this to me alone, and has asked me to forward it
along to the list.

Valete
Fortunatus
_______________________

Salvete Quirites.

I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know who
might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum
Aetate.

I make this request on my own, but I'm sure the rest of the citizenry,
as well as the Senators, would like to know this information. The
Senators especially will need this information since we will have to
take some action regarding said law and any dispensations.

Valete.
C. Aelius Ericius.
Senator. Pontifex. Augur. Paterfamilias Gens Aelia.

--- In novaroma@--------, Fortunatus <labienus@t...> wrote:
> T Labienus Censoribus Quiritibusque S P D
>
> A thought has occurred to me. Two candidates have already stated
that
> they are running in the hopes of being excepted from the Lex Iunia
de
> Magistratum Aetate by the censores and Senate. I wish them both
luck,
> and applaud their desire to serve the res publica. It is, however,
> quite possible that there are some others who have not informed the
> people that they may not be able to assume office due to the law.
It
> has been nearly a year since the passage of the law, and it is quite
> possible that some of our candidates have either forgotten or are
too
> new to have known about its specific requirements.
>
> I would, therefore, like to ask the censores to let us know if
anyone
> else is under the age required to serve in the office for which he
or
> she is running. I am not asking that they reveal what the person's
age
> is, but merely whether or not a special dispensation would need to
be
> made for each candidate.
>
> The minimum ages required are:
> 27 for censor or consul
> 25 for praetor or tribunus plebis
> 21 for quaestor, aedile, or any of the Vigintisexviri
>
> While nothing requires a candidate to announce whether or not he or
she
> meets the requirements of Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate, I believe
> that everyone is entitled to know whether or not the candidate of
his or
> her choice meets the requirements stated in the law. Any candidate
that
> does not meet its requirements would need the approval of both
censores
> and 2/3 of the Senate in order to serve their term of office. This
is a
> major factor to weigh when considering one's choice.
>
> Valete

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976212048/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Propraetoris Edictum for Limes Cooperation
From:	=?iso-8859-1?B?WWFubiBRdely6Q==?= <yquere@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 19:09:33 +0100

These is an edictum propraetoricium enacted by Ianus Querius Armoricus Lutecio, Propraetor Provinciae Galliae.

I. The Provincia Gallia hereby joins the Limes Cooperation.

II. The co-operation is not restricted in its scope of application but shall
cover in particular the following fields:
a) Provincial infrastructure (e.g. Web-Site development)
b) Development of common provincial administrative standards
c) Organisation of conferences and meetings
d) Co-ordination of research projects of common interest

III. The co-operation shall be implemented by all means necessary and
available in an internet-environment. In particular a restricted e-mail-list
shall be established for this purpose. A scriba shall be responsible for its
moderation.

IV. The co-operation is open to all provinces of Nova Roma which have been
established by Senatus Consultum. The respective provincial governor may
join the co-operation by enactment of an edictum making the co-operation
applicable in the respective province.

V. Any disputes arising out of the co-operation shall be settled by way of
mediation. A mediator has to be agreed upon by all affected governors.

Ianus Querius Armoricus Lutecio
Propraetor Galliae
Facto in Lutecia (07/12/2000)

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

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976212630/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	=?iso-8859-1?B?WWFubiBRdely6Q==?= <yquere@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 19:32:40 +0100

Salvete Quiritibus

My opinion on this matter relies in one sentence that a french poet once
said
"Aux �mes bien n�es, la valeur n'attend pas le nombre des ann�es"
which could be translated (without the poetical souding, sorry) into
"For those valuable, worthiness doesn't wait the number of years"

Simply to say that some people are obviously eager to real and strong
implication into the administration of Nova Roma,. It is easy to recognize
if a person is valuable or not, on his ability to perform simple and harder
things, regardless to one's age.
I would like to take the example of Sextus Apollonius Draco : he is
absolutely worthless for Gallia despite of his young age.

I think this law needs to be flexible in order not to prevent NR from taking
all the advantage of young, dynamic and valuable people who would take part
in.

Valete Bene
I. Querius Armoricus Lutecio
Propraetor Galliae

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976214016/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Mike Macnair <MikeMacnair@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:31:52 -0500

Salvete!

Ericius wrote,

>I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know who
>might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum
>Aetate.

>I make this request on my own, but I'm sure the rest of the citizenry,
>as well as the Senators, would like to know this information. The
>Senators especially will need this information since we will have to
>take some action regarding said law and any dispensations.

For what it's worth, I am 46.

Also for what it's worth. I think that this Lex is somewhat misconceived,
since it is only in rare cases that anyone will have access to evidence
which establishes the real age of any civis of Nova Roma, as opposed to the
age they claim to be. More practical and more pertinent to our needs would
be (a) a lex specifying minimum periods of citizenship before standing for
office, and (b) some form of Cursus Honorum legislation which means that
you normally start with less responsible posts, or perhaps even (as the
provinciae become more established) that you start with service in
provincial office before standing for central office.

The present power to exempt is there for the obvious reason that NR is so
small that it can't afford to be picky about age or any other factor if it
is to fill offices without calling on the same few people to move from
office to office, which is undesirable. We should be generous with it. But
that's a matter for the Senate and the Censors.

Valete,

M. Mucius Scaevola Magister

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976217643/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	razenna@--------
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 20:00:46 -0000

I. Thank you Labienus.

II. I was against this law from its first conception. I argued
against this law when it was up for discussion. I believed, and
believe that the first and foremost thing such a law can accomplish is
to reduce the number of people who can hold offices, and thereby
serve, Nova Roma. This comes at a time in the history of Nova Roma
when we do not have all that many people who are willing and able to
take on the duties and responsibilities that an office involves.
There were underage citizens who were strongly in favor of this law,
Gn. Tarquinius Caesar for one. Be all that as it may, the law passed.
It is the current law of this land of Nova Roma.

C. Aelius Ericius.

--- In novaroma@--------, labienus@t... wrote:
> Salvete
>
> C Aelius accidentally sent this to me alone, and has asked me to
forward it
> along to the list.
>
> Valete
> Fortunatus
> _______________________
>
> Salvete Quirites.
>
> I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know
who
> might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum
> Aetate.
>
> I make this request on my own, but I'm sure the rest of the
citizenry,
> as well as the Senators, would like to know this information. The
> Senators especially will need this information since we will have to
> take some action regarding said law and any dispensations.
>
> Valete.
> C. Aelius Ericius.
> Senator. Pontifex. Augur. Paterfamilias Gens Aelia.
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, Fortunatus <labienus@t...> wrote:
> > T Labienus Censoribus Quiritibusque S P D
> >
> > A thought has occurred to me. Two candidates have already stated
> that
> > they are running in the hopes of being excepted from the Lex Iunia
> de
> > Magistratum Aetate by the censores and Senate. I wish them both
> luck,
> > and applaud their desire to serve the res publica. It is,
however,
> > quite possible that there are some others who have not informed
the
> > people that they may not be able to assume office due to the law.

> It
> > has been nearly a year since the passage of the law, and it is
quite
> > possible that some of our candidates have either forgotten or are
> too
> > new to have known about its specific requirements.
> >
> > I would, therefore, like to ask the censores to let us know if
> anyone
> > else is under the age required to serve in the office for which he
> or
> > she is running. I am not asking that they reveal what the
person's
> age
> > is, but merely whether or not a special dispensation would need to
> be
> > made for each candidate.
> >
> > The minimum ages required are:
> > 27 for censor or consul
> > 25 for praetor or tribunus plebis
> > 21 for quaestor, aedile, or any of the Vigintisexviri
> >
> > While nothing requires a candidate to announce whether or not he
or
> she
> > meets the requirements of Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate, I
believe
> > that everyone is entitled to know whether or not the candidate of
> his or
> > her choice meets the requirements stated in the law. Any
candidate
> that
> > does not meet its requirements would need the approval of both
> censores
> > and 2/3 of the Senate in order to serve their term of office.
This
> is a
> > major factor to weigh when considering one's choice.
> >
> > Valete

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976219262/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"Jeroen Meuleman" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:07:13 +0100

Salve, Lutecio!

> My opinion on this matter relies in one sentence that a french poet once
> said
> "Aux �mes bien n�es, la valeur n'attend pas le nombre des ann�es"
> which could be translated (without the poetical souding, sorry) into
> "For those valuable, worthiness doesn't wait the number of years"
>
> Simply to say that some people are obviously eager to real and strong
> implication into the administration of Nova Roma,. It is easy to recognize
> if a person is valuable or not, on his ability to perform simple and
harder
> things, regardless to one's age.
> I would like to take the example of Sextus Apollonius Draco : he is
> absolutely worthless for Gallia despite of his young age.

Je te remercie beaucoup. But I hope that the word "worthless" was a typo!
:-D.

> I think this law needs to be flexible in order not to prevent NR from
taking
> all the advantage of young, dynamic and valuable people who would take
part
> in.

Hear hear. Oh, and for what's worth it, next year in May I will be turning
18.

Vale optime,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous fran�ais? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976219785/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Electiions
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 15:31:28 EST

Salvete,

That was a very powerful and well spoken post.

Valete
Aeternia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976221099/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	marcusaemiliusscaurus@--------
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 20:46:30 -0000

Salve Quirites,

I am a candidate for Rogator, and am 19, and have sought an exemption
from the Senate.

Valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976221999/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Subjects: My Endorsements for Offices & Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"Lucius Equitius" <vze23hw7@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:06:53 -0500

Salvete, Quirites

From: Art McGrath <amcgrath@-------->
Endorsements

Salvete,

Some citizens have asked me who I support in this election. I hereby
make the following endorsments:

For censor I endorse Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus. He is one of the most
dedidated people to Nova Roma that I know. He has served her as a senior
magistrate, as a Pontiff, a Flamen and as a Senator. He suffered a
severe political setback last year that would have driven a lesser man
to his knees and fostered long-standing bitterness. However, he never
gave up and his dedication to Nova Roma never faltered. In addition, he
is familiar with the job of censor and would need little training. He
heped me last year with censorial work and is helping the current
censor, Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix.

Valete, Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus,
Senator, Pontiff - Consul 1999, Censor 1998-1999, Praetor 1998

Lucius Equitius: I wish to give sincere thanks to Senator Consularis Decius
Iunius for his generous statement. This means a great deal to me to have the
endorsement of the founders. They had a vision when they began Nova Roma and
I have joined them in their work We have worked together and fought each
other, but we have always agreed on the goal of reestablishing the Roman
Religio and Virtues, which 'are most sorely lacking in our society today.'
Mille Gratias tibi Palladii ago!

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate

Salvete

C Aelius accidentally sent this to me alone, and has asked me to forward it
along to the list.

Valete
Fortunatus
_______________________

Salvete Quirites.

I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know who
might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum
Aetate.

I make this request on my own, but I'm sure the rest of the citizenry,
as well as the Senators, would like to know this information. The
Senators especially will need this information since we will have to
take some action regarding said law and any dispensations.

Valete.
C. Aelius Ericius.
Senator. Pontifex. Augur. Paterfamilias Gens Aelia.

Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus: Candidatus Censori
XLV anni habeo. (I am 45 years
old)
Idus October MMDCCVIII auc. (15
Oct. 1955)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate

Rex dixit:
Salve Censor Sulla!

With all due respect for your office (which I am myself seeking in this
election) and your experience as Praetor urbanus in Nova Roma I am inclined
to disagree with you on your interpretation of the respective lex Iunia de
Magistratum aetate.

This lex is based on Article IV of the Vedian constitution where it is
stipulated that:

With regard to this last sentence the Lex Iunia de magistratum aetate states
that for the offices of Censor, Consul, Praetor, Quaestor and Aedile "No
person may assume the office..."

An exception to the law may be granted by senatus consultum (2/3) plus
approval by both Censors.

Lucius Equitius: True, Which means that the Senate would have to
specifically address an instance, given that both Censores agree that such
an action should proceed and vote to overturn the Lex. If the Senate were to
not vote then the case would be decided by the Lex.

Rex:
Now, I am not a native English speaker, but to "assume" office is something
completely different to "being a candidate" for office.

Lucius Equitius: True,

Rex:
To show to you what the legislature meant by "assuming" I might point your
attention to the Lex Iunia de Iusurando (as shown in the Tabularium). There
it is stipulated that: "All magistrates, Propraetors, Senators, etc. are
required to take the following oath in a public forum (ie onelist or Nova
Roma's message board) before they can assume (sic!!!) office"

Lucius Equitius: True,

Rex:
Now that makes it absolutely clear to me that one has to be a candidate and
elected, or elevated to the Senate or appointed as propraetor etc. first
before you can "assume" office. I therefore conclude that in the statutory
language of the lex Iunia de magistrate aetatum no binding duty to seek
exception for a "candidacy" is included.

Lucius Equitius: True,

Rex:
Would it make sense to seek approval before becoming a candidate? Yes and
no.

Lucius Equitius: Yes, in the interest of honesty, and also in the interest
of saving time of all involved.

Rex:
The Senate and the Censors would have to override the popular vote to keep
an elected "youngster", who obviously performed well in his campaign, from
taking his office.

Lucius Equitius: I disagree, the Senate would have to vote to override the
Lex to invest the candidate with the office. If the Censores do nothing
and/or the Senate does nothing then the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
rules.
The Lex stands until 'overridden' by the Censores and the Senate, not to
mention any 'veto' along the way.

Rex:
Therefore, if I were such a "youngster" (which I am not, I am 30 years old),
I would ask AFTER my election. Also, it would mean less work for the Senate
and the Censors only to address the question of the lex after the election
with those who got elected.

Lucius Equitius: I disagree for reasons given above, and below.

Rex:
On the other hand, as Censor Sulla pointed out, it might well be important
to know for the electorate BEFORE the election, if the vote for the
candidate will count in the end. But if the personal qualities of this
person are so clearly showing, I, as a voter, would certainly believe that
the Senate and the Censors would also follow.

Lucius Equitus: My opinion is that each candidate should ensure they are
eligible before they announce themselves. To do this under the Law they need
to contact the Censores who may then sponsor such a request in the Senate.

Rex:
Therefore, as the statutory language is unambiguous on this and there is no
clear ratio for a teleological reduction by interpretation, I am of the
legal opinion that it is NOT necessary to seek an exemption from the lex
Iunia de magistratum aretate BEFORE the election.

Marcus Marcius Rex
Candidate for Censor
Senator

Lucius Equitius: I agree that it is not necessary under the Law, as written,
to run for office.
However, given that a citizen cannot 'assume' an office until having
attained the minimum age as set forth in the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
[(12/21/99): http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/lex99211201.html ] unless
approved by both Censores and voted by 2/3 of the Senate, I would hope that
such a candidate would observe the 'spirit' of the Law and seek an exemption
from the lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate BEFORE the election.

Mars nos protegas!
Valete, Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus - Candidatus Censori (candidate for
Censor)
Senator, Pontifex, Augur

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976223026/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia De Magistratum Aetate
From:	nramos@--------
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 21:44:17 -0000

Salve Quirites!

Having observed some of the debate about this Lex, and of some of
the arguments presented, I'd like to make a few observations (and
please keep in mind, these are my opinions only):

- The reason for establishing such a law is the expectancy that
someone may have developed a corpus of experience in dealing with a
wide variety of situations by a specific age. The increases in the
age
limits reflect the idea that these positions require more experience
-
not that we need to keep them out of the hands of our younger
members.
While age is not perhaps the ideal indicator of the level of
experience or ability of a person, it is an objective indicator (
wrinkles or lack thereof cannot be explained by words!)

- The Lex does exist; if we are to continue the experiment that is
Nova Roma, then we must abide by the conditions by which we began it.
If this Lex should be changed (and for the sake of argument, let us
say it should), then it should be changed by the methods we have
established in our Constitution. If we are just to set aside our laws
whenever we feel like it, why would we have laws?

- This having been said: I have no doubts whatsoever about the
abilities and enthusiasm of Sextus Appollonius Draco. My only
recommendation to him - and by the way, to us all, is that we may
disagree on given subjects without inciting hatred or dissension
between us. We have enough strife in our respective macronations -
let
us leave it there.

- One last thing - limiting participation by time as a cives of
Nova
Roma may not be the best approach. Some people "lurk" for several
weeks, and even months, before they decide to commit to being a
cives.
Sometimes, these "newcomers" may actually be a little better informed
than their fellows about the issues of our Res Publica. I think it
would be better to have everyone that wants to help do so - and those
who are ineligible for election be appointed as Scribes, Legati, etc.
so that their good energy does not go to waste. Instead of spending
time arguing and trading insults, it would be better to think about
how we can contribute to improving our Res Publica.

This is my humble opinion, nothing more. Iuppiter nos protegas!

Marius Cornelius Scipio

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976225466/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 17:02:58 -0500

Salve,

I will join the other candidates thus far and divulge my age (goodness knows
I don't subscribe to the theory that one ought not *ask* a lady LOL) as 30
years.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Candidate for Curatrix Sermonem

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976226722/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Pro Tullius Cicero
From:	Oppius Flaccus <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:45:55 -0800 (PST)

Ave,

I might my humble opinion, invoking the name
of Kennedy when discussing the impact of words vs.
actions, weakens the excellent points which you make
regarding Cicero. In adding some additional
perspective to the theme, Kennedy was every bit as
much (if not significantly more so,) flawed as any of
the worst politicians of ours or any era. In
remembering Kennedy's immortal words, we should also
note the following:

1-JFK's father purchased the presidential election for
him. Cicero at least was a legitimate Consul.

2-Kennedy's famous "ask not" speech was extremely
hypocritical, as his administration (and subsequently
Johnson's) ushered in the era of war, protest, and
ruinous entitlements such as Medicare and increased
welfare subsidies other "great society" programs.
These were very much centered on the principals of
'asking your country what it can do for you, and if
your country doesn't give you enough then complain
continually, riot and threaten until it gives you
more.'

3-Kennedy used the White House as his private brothel,
slept through key senate and subcommittee meetings and
let Cuba go under. <<To name but a few of his dubious
accomplishments.>>

As in the ancient days of Saturninus and the great
public grain giveaway proposals, if you promise the
masses lots of free stuff, they will follow you
anywhere. In other words, Kennedy was the typical
politician, only remembered 'fondly' because he was
martyred, as Cicero was before him.

Lest it be said that this is an anti-Kennedy tirade,
one could take many key politicians or public figures
from current or past society and enumerate significant
faults. In Cicero's time, he was looked upon at best
as a moderately able statesman and certainly the most
gifted orator of his generation. At worst, a bumbling
outsider (Homo Novus) that didn't have control over
his own family or life. The fact also remains that
Cicero was easily manipulated by Pompey, the Boni and
his wife, lived way beyond his means with his
continual acquisition of villas, and of course as you
mention Sulla Felix: his handling of the Catalinian
conspiracy was abominable. Cicero should have stood
trial for this action when his imperium ended; but
that's another matter. Certainly the Catalinian affair
is the worst element of his legacy. Also, Cicero had
the great benefit in history that other figures have
lacked; many of his writings have remained intact, so
it easy to see him in a more favorable light today.

In my view, Cicero should be remembered as we would
remember any great writer or orator. Extremely gifted
as a writer and orator, but significantly lacking in
other (perhaps more important) ways. He was able to
achieve some notable success due to his keen abilities
as a wordsmith; in a Roman society which at that time
put an inordinately high emphasis on oratorial skills.
It is difficult to see him as any more than that;
assuming that one can truly put the modern
'sensibilities' aside and look at the past in a
detached manner.

Anyway, enough said. I hope to not have offended
anyone here with my remarks, just felt that some
additional perspective was warranted.

Salve,
Oppius Flaccus Severus

--- Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
wrote:
> Ave,
>
> Thank you for posting that. Its very nice. Cicero
> too was a great and flawed
> man. We must view the past with detachment. Lest
> we forget that, Cicero executed
> Roman Citizens without trial. While his letters are
> beautiful, knowledgable, we
> must remember that words are just that. Actions
> also speak and they speak louder
> than words too. Especially in Nova Roma, where we
> have mainly words to go by, we
> must look at the actions of our citizens,
> magistrates and candidates for office.
> As, late President John Kennedy stated so
> eloquently, "...Ask not what your
> country can do for you, but what you can do for your
> country!"
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> Censor
>
> Gian G Reali wrote:
>
> > Salvete Quirites
> >
> > Today, 7 Dec., marks the 2710th
> anniversary of the execution of Cicero
> > by agentes of Marc Antonius. I offer some of
> Cicero's words that we may
> > remember him by.
> >
> > Ubi tyrannus est, ibi plane est nulla res
> publica.
> > Where there is tyrany, plainly
> there is no republic.
> >
> > Ut sementem feceris, ita metes.
> > As you sow, so shall you reap (De
> oratore).
> >
> > Pauci viri veros amicos habent, et pauci
> sunt digni.
> > Few men have true friends, and
> fewer still are worthy of them.
> >
> > Obsequium parit amicus; veritas parit
> odium.
> > Compliance makes you his friend;
> truth wins you his hate.
> >
> > Epistula non erubescit.
> > A letter does not blush.
> >
> > Dicebat ille miser, "Civis Pomanus sum."
> > This poor man said only, "I am a
> citizen of Rome."
> >
> > Curate ut valeatis.
> > Moravius Piscinus
> >
>
________________________________________________________________
> > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for
> less!
> > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
> >
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976229156/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Candidate Recommendations
From:	"Nick Ford" <gens_moravia@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 22:00:02 -0000

Quiritibus salutem

Excuse my absence from the Forum for the past couple of days. I have been reading more e-mails than I have ever had before, replying to some, and with others resisting a natural desire to share with you all what I really think about them and their authors. On reflection, though, I have decided to leave that to your imagination. It would do nothing for what's left of the dignity of Nova Roma, which as it is we are going to have to try to repair when the votes have been cast and counted.

An old spiritual mentor of mine once told me: "If you can't deal without lowering your standards, then don't deal." I apologise to all of you whom I have disappointed in disregarding such noble advice lately. Conversely, to those of you whom my anger has given the perverse satisfaction that you delight in, I make no apology, as you deserve none.

I'm going to try to be more constructive. Following the example of Consul and Praetorial candidate Q. Fabius Maximus, I offer the voters here a list of of the candidates I can recommend to you most, and why. If I had no personal loyalties, friendships or enmities, no partisan feelings at all, this is how I would be voting.

There are many difficult choices to make, especially as we now are allowed only one vote for each position. This has forced me in some cases, as I think it will you, to eliminate some extremely worthy candidates. Read on - I promise you at least one or two surprises.

Censor: Marcus Marcius Rex - As well as being a 'real life' senior government official who could easily do the job and streamline it too because he has a senior manager's overview, he has no personal animosity against anyone in Nova Roma. Given the present power Censors have in Nova Roma, this is a quality I counsel you all to consider very carefully.

Consul: Marcus Cassius Iulianus - This true Roman gentleman also has no personal animosity against anyone in NR. More than the other candidates, I think, he is the most amenable to the differing viewpoints of all citizens.

Praetor: Caius Flavius Diocletianus - He too can boast the best combination of experience, length of citizenship, and lack of enemies in NR, of any candidate.

Curulis Aedilis: Sorry, I'd have to pray to the gods and flip a coin to choose between Titus Sertorius Albinus and Marius Cornelius Scipio (I mean that as a compliment, gentlemen).

Aedilis Plebis: Ditto. Sextus Apollonius Draco and Marcus Arminius Maior have both done much for Nova Roma, and both promise a great deal more. Out with that coin again...

Tribunus Plebis: Titus Labienus Fortunatus - Really another Cassius in terms of true Romanitas and, like Cassius, he enjoys the esteem of most and the enmity and mistrust of none. His experience in the Senate will be invaluable, and his track records of activity and courteous temper do not cancel each other out.

Quaestor: Secunda Cornelia Valeria - For her diverse fiscal experience at management level, although many others - Patricia Cassia, Marcus Minucius Audens and Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator are also worthy in experience, it would be a shocking waste not to choose Secunda Cornelia, since the others already have much else to do for the betterment of Nova Roma.

Rogator: Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus - He has already done valuable work both for me as Scriba Propraetoris Britanniae, and for Pompeia Cornelia Strabo in Consul Audens' Office of Accensi. Britannicus has also showed a great deal of determination in repeatedly applying for this thankless post.

There you have it, citizens. I expect hoots of derision from some in response. But perhaps I shall be pleasantly surprised. I shall of course be happy to discuss these recommendations further with anyone who wishes to be other than inane or insulting.

Avete

Vado.

[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/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976230584/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Tr: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	=?iso-8859-1?B?WWFubiBRdely6Q==?= <yquere@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 00:20:35 +0100

Sorry, I meant worthy, valuable and not worthless ... my english need
improvement

----- Original Message -----
From: Yann Qu�r� <yquere@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate

> Salvete Quiritibus
>
> My opinion on this matter relies in one sentence that a french poet once
> said
> "Aux �mes bien n�es, la valeur n'attend pas le nombre des ann�es"
> which could be translated (without the poetical souding, sorry) into
> "For those valuable, worthiness doesn't wait the number of years"
>
> Simply to say that some people are obviously eager to real and strong
> implication into the administration of Nova Roma,. It is easy to recognize
> if a person is valuable or not, on his ability to perform simple and
harder
> things, regardless to one's age.
> I would like to take the example of Sextus Apollonius Draco : he is
> absolutely worthwhile for Gallia despite of his young age.
>
> I think this law needs to be flexible in order not to prevent NR from
taking
> all the advantage of young, dynamic and valuable people who would take
part
> in.
>
> Valete Bene
> I. Querius Armoricus Lutecio
> Propraetor Galliae
>
>
>
>
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976231295/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	[novaroma] Subjects: My Endorsements for Offices & Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"Marc " <RexMarcius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 23:28:18 -0000

Salve Lucie Equitie!

Just a few additional remarks on the lex Iunia de magistratum aetate:

I fully agree with you, my esteemed co-candidate, honesty is of
course one of the most important characteristics for someone running
for office.

But honesty is not an issue here.

All those candidates who are indeed underage in this election have -
to the best of my knowledge - not been quiet about it.

Therefore, let me tell you what I think the spirit of the lex is (I
spent maybe too much time on the wording of it in my first post):

An underage candidate who wants to become a magistrate is faced with
a lex that is based on the assumption that she/he is too young for
the office:

Because at his/her age......

he/she is supposed to be too inexperienced for the office
she/he is supposed not to have the necessary means for the office
he/she is supposed not to be dedicated enough for the office
she/he is supposed not .....(you will find more, if you think hard
enough)

Looking at this, a very old dispute between two Roman law schools
(the Sabinians and the Proculians) comes to mind. One of the schools
was putting emphasis on strict age limits whereas the other wanted to
look only at the concrete maturity of the person (child) involved.

Now, our lex took the road of the strict age limits but leaves room
for citizens already mature enough, although they are too young in
years.

But those citizens face a steep road to climb. They have to persuade

the people in the election
2/3 of the Senate
and both Censors (of which you could very soon be one!).

If they succeed in doing all of that, they will certainly have proved
their maturity beyond any doubt and they will be more than worthy to
assume their offices.

But the lex does not tell the candidate in what order to address
these obstacles. And now, my dear Lucie Equitie, comes the best part
for me:
I believe the spirit of the lex is, that the WAY a candidate
addresses this obstacle is part of his "maturity test"!

To give you an example:
It seems that for someone facing me as Censor it might be enough to
seek approval after the election took place and the people have
already shown their confidence in him.

Whereas with Censor Sulla he/she should certainly show the kind of
respect our esteemed Censor expects (i.e. the Senate is more
important than the people and their vote) and ask the august fathers
and the Censors well before the election for approval, so not to
insult them and cause them not to act at all (something the august
fathers have btw chosen to do so far anyway in the cases of those who
cared to ask well before these elections!).

Of course, you can hold it against me, that I myself, although rich
in years, would fail Sulla's maturity test.

Ave et Vale
Marcus Marcius Rex
Candidate for Censor
Senator
Propraetor Germaniae

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976231708/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] My age (was Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate)
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:40:37 -0600

Salvete

It has occurred to me that I have yet to divulge my own age. As of
today, I am 32.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976232349/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->