Subject:	[novaroma] Oath of Office by Marius Cornelius Scipio
From:	nramos@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 23:44:11 -0000

I, Marius Cornelius Scipio (Nick R. Ramos Jr.),do hereby solemnly
swear to uphold the honor of Nova Roma, and to act always in the best
interests of the people and the Senate of Nova Roma.

As a magistrate of Nova Roma, I, Marius Cornelius Scipio (Nick
R. Ramos Jr.), swear to honor the Gods and Goddesses of Rome in my
public dealings, and to pursue the Roman Virtues in my public and
private life.

I, Marius Cornelius Scipio (Nick R. Ramos Jr.), swear to uphold
and defend the Religio Romana as the State Religion of Nova Roma and
swear never to act in a way that would threaten its status as the
State Religion.

I, Marius Cornelius Scipio (Nick R. Ramos Jr.), swear to protect
and defend the Constitution of Nova Roma.

I, Marius Cornelius Scipio (Nick R. Ramos Jr.),further swear to
fulfill the obligations and responsibilities of the office of Curule
Aedile to the best of my abilities.

On my honor as a Citizen of Nova Roma, and in the presence of
the Gods and Goddesses of the Roman people and by their will and
favor,do I accept the position of Curule Aedile and all the rights,
privileges, obligations, and responsibilities attendant thereto.

Marius Cornelius Scipio

Subject:	[novaroma] Message board issues
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 15:56:12 -0800

Ave!

Is anyone else having problems accessing messages from the NR Message Board (http://venus.beseen.com/boardroom/j/17263). When I click on a message I get this error:


the message you requested could not be found

(,02639a02765a02955)
Keys:

What can we do to repair this problem?

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Hello
From:	allan001@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:36:36 -0200

"J. T. Sibley" wrote:

> Salve Marcus Drusillus! Welcome to Nova Roma! We're spread out all over
> the globe, but our Imperium enjoys all the latest and best in communication
> technology...and even I, a wandering Romano-British soothsayer, can hear
> the learned words of our elected officials and the Pontifex Maximus, and
> vote in elections! Ave Roma!
> Vale,
> S. Ambrosia Fulvia

A soothsayer you say? do tell. anything that you would like to share of teh
future?



Marcus Drusillus Scaevola



--
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defence.

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Message board issues
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 01:01:58 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
wrote:
> Ave!
>
> Is anyone else having problems accessing messages from the NR
Message Board (http://venus.beseen.com/boardroom/j/17263). When I
click on a message I get this error:
>
>
> the message you requested could not be found
>
> (,02639a02765a02955)
> Keys:
>
> What can we do to repair this problem?
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Salve, Lucius Cornelius,

I had no problem accessing the board. Perhaps it was just a momentary
glitch in the software.

Valve,
L. Sicinius Drusus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Message board issues
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 17:45:12 -0800

Ave,

Nope I just checked it again...6 messages...I still have that same issue!
:( wierd....

Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 5:01 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Message board issues


> --- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
> wrote:
> > Ave!
> >
> > Is anyone else having problems accessing messages from the NR
> Message Board (http://venus.beseen.com/boardroom/j/17263). When I
> click on a message I get this error:
> >
> >
> > the message you requested could not be found
> >
> > (,02639a02765a02955)
> > Keys:
> >
> > What can we do to repair this problem?
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> Salve, Lucius Cornelius,
>
> I had no problem accessing the board. Perhaps it was just a momentary
> glitch in the software.
>
> Valve,
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>
>
>
>

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Amer. Austroccidentalis Summer Roman Retreat
From:	"Oppius Flaccus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 19:48:17 -0600

Yes; and I've also put together a small gathering of ate least 4-5 cives
in America Boreoccidentalis! Congratulations to us all! :-)

Vale bene,
-Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Flavius Vedius Germanicus [mailto:germanicus@--------]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 3:49 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: RE: [novaroma] Amer. Austroccidentalis Summer Roman Retreat


Salvete;

I just wanted to congratulate Livia Cornelia, Iulia Cornelia, and all the
Cives of America Austroccidentalis provincia on this wonderful news. The
more such real-world events we have, I'm convinced the stronger and better
off we'll be. Well done!

Now... how about you other governors??? ;-)

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org


eGroups Sponsor




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Message board issues
From:	tekwkp@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:58:11 EST

Ave,

Perhaps its' the server? Well, there is some electronic problem. I just
retired from the Federal government and we were forever witnessing Server
Down problems. My messages seem to be delivered fine. However, I have not
tried to transmit a message to NovaRoma.

Lentulus Cornelius Drusus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] The New Guy...
From:	"Oppius Flaccus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:01:40 -0600

Salve Publius Gramatinicus Albinus! A warm and hearty welcome
to Nova Roma!

-Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Syphax the venaliccii [mailto:syphax_venaliccii@--------]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 12:24 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] The New Guy...


Salve fellow New Romans! I am Publius Gramatinicus
Albinus! I wish the best of everything for everyone,
and hope you all well.


pax et lux,
Publius Gramatinicus Albinus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

eGroups Sponsor




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Greetings!
From:	tekwkp@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 21:07:38 EST

I feel priveleged to have just received word of being admitted as a Citizen
of New Rome. Further, it is meaningful in all ways to have been adopted by
the Illustrious
Gens Cornelia. I believe it will be an aupbeat affiliation in all ways.

Ave!

Lentulus Cornelius Brutus

aka Tom Kasinger

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:35:01 -0600

Salve M Octavi

I snipped M Octavi's admirable response to an unfortunate snide
comment. I've had a very bad day, and I succumbed to the temptation.

> Interesting, I had never noticed that! Still, it's only a slight
> advantage... class V has 22 centuries and class IV has 30 centuries.
> So new patrician citizens, during their first six months, will have
> a slight advantage in the centuries... a poor substitute for being
> unable to vote for the Tribunes.

I never said that it was a large advantage. And, I'd say that the
important thing is not voting upon tribuni, but rather voting upon the
plebiscita those tribuni promulgate. Currently, there's nothing
stopping a pair of tribuni from putting forth a plebiscitum that, say,
forbids patricians from standing for consul. (I would hope, of course,
that such an injustice would fail to pass.)

> As time goes by, the patrician bonus points become a relatively
> insignificant part of a citizen's total points, but plebeians still
> have the advantage of being able to vote for Tribune.

Agreed entirely.

> (It reminds me of playing "Dungeons & Dragons"... wizards in that
> game, prohibited from wearing armor, have a high mortality rate
> at the low levels... but if they survive they become much more
> powerful than the other types of character).

Actually, the whole century point system reminds me a bit of a
role-playing game. However, I don't have a better idea to replace it,
and I do prefer the idea of a class system based upon merit rather than
birth.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Amer. Austroccidentalis Summer Roman Retreat
From:	"Oppius Flaccus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:54:33 -0600

Salve Aurelia! Yup, gens Flacca is still most interested
in tracking the details. Please let us know what you
decide.

Vale bene,
-Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: gmvick32@-------- [mailto:gmvick32@--------]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 3:37 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Amer. Austroccidentalis Summer Roman Retreat


Salvete, Quirities!

This is to announce that Provincia America Austroccidentalis
is currently planning a Roman Retreat for the summer of
2001, targeted for mid-July.

In keeping with the tradition of the Romans to retire to the
countryside in order to escape the heat of summer, we will
be retreating to the mountains for a weekend getaway.
Included in the festivities will be a Roman cooking
experiment and feast (better bonding through cookery), hikes
in the woods, a tour of the Colorado backcountry, and
....R&R time to chat and relax.

It will also be the pleasure of the governor to preceed the
retreat with a hosted dinner and historical tour of downtown
Denver.

Any and all Nova Romans are welcome to attend this event!!
We are still working out the details, but if you're
interested please contact me ASAP.

This event is sponsored by the Propraetrix Livia Cornelia
Aurelia, and is the brainchild of it's co-coordinator, Iulia
Cornelia Gaia.

Valete,
Livia Cornelia Aurelia
Propraetrix, America Austroccidentalis





eGroups Sponsor




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Message board issues
From:	tekwkp@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 22:16:11 EST

Ave,

Sorry, I just got into the system, and was able to pull messages, new and
old.Were you subjected to the the rolling blackouts in this province/ They
were widespread, or so the televisionus broadcastems [well, I'm trying] were
teh culprits.

Salve,

L. Cornelius Drusus

Subject:	[novaroma] Powers of the Tribunes
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 03:08:35 -0000

The Gens Sicinia takes special intrest in the powers of the Tribunes
of the Plebes. It was L. Sicinius Velutrus who led the secessio of the
Plebes that led to the establishment of the office of Tribune of the
Plebes. It was Lucius Sicinius who started the campaign to restore the
powers that the Dictator Sulla striped from the Tribunes. The Gens
Sicinia applauds the tribunes for thier efforts to protect the Powers
of the Tribunes of the Plebes.

Some have argued that in the intrest of fairness laws should be bought
before the People rather than the Plebes. I concur that it would be
fair to have all the people vote on laws, however the Tribunes of the
Plebes lack the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to meet. They
are limited to working with the Comita Plebis Tributa. If we accept
the view that all laws should be passed by the Comitia Populi Tributa,
then we have greatly weakened the powers of the Tribunes. They would
be limited to going hat in hand begging for the Comitia Populi to be
called on, rather than summoning the the Comitia Plebis. While I have
no doubt that our present Consuls and Praetors would not hesitate to
honor such a request from the Tribunes, the day could come when we
have Consuls and Praetors with less intregity, who might refuse the
request. It's better to firmly establish the precedents now. If the
Patricians wish to vote on laws the Tribunes want enacted, Then I
sugest that rather than making sugestions that have the effect of
limiting the powers of the Tribunes, they use thier influance in the
Comitia Centuria and the Senate to amend the Constitution so that the
Tribunes would have the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to
meet.

Part of the problem here is how the Ordo Patricius has been handled in
Nova Roma. The Patricians form a far greater percentage of the
population in Nova Roma than they ever did in Roma Antiquita. In the
old Republic Patricians were a tiny minority, and barring them from
the Comitia Plebis didn't result in a major portion of the population
being barred from voting on leges. The few additional votes the
patricians would have been able to cast would have rarely made a
difference in the outcome of a vote. During most of the history of
Respublica Roma there were only two ways to become a Patrician. To be
born a Patrician, or to adopted as the son of a Patrician. New
Citizens NEVER were accepted into the Ordo Patricius. For example if a
member of the Patrician Gens Cornelia freed a slave, this freeman
would become a citizen, and a client of his former master. He would be
a member of his Patron's Gens, but despite the fact that he was a
member of Gens Cornelia, he WOULDN"T be a patrician. He would be a
Plebian member of the Gens. The same applies to a freeman who became a
citizen through the actions of a member of a Patrician Gens. By
allowing new citizens to become members of the Ordo Patricius Nova
Roma has created a population with a far higher percentage of
Patricians than Historical Rome ever had.

I would also like to commit on the 5 extra points that seems to
concern so many Plebians. When I decided to apply for citizenship I
looked at those points and compared to being ineligible to vote in one
of the comitia, and being unable to vote for or run for the Tribune.
Those 5 points are nothing compared to the penalities that patricians
operate under. There is a far worse problem with the Comitia Centuria
than those 5 points. It's the points for time as a citizen. I have no
problem with active citizens recieving these points, however I'm sure
that there are some people who became citizens during the early days
of Nova Roma, and are no longer taking part in Nova Roma. 3 years mean
30 points while 2 years mean 20 points. These citizens who no longer
take an active role in Nova Roma will wind up being in the first or
second classes, forcing newer citizens who are active into the lower
classes. According to Livy one of the Centuries was for the head
count. If we applied the same princeples to the Centuries as we do to
the tribes, we could assign all citizens who fail to vote to the Capti
Censi as well as to the Urban tribes. This would't have any effect on
thier points, and they could regain thier place in the classes by
voting this December. It would open up places in the higher classes
for those who are active though.

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 23:04:51 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fortunatus [mailto:labienus@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 9:35 PM
>
> > (It reminds me of playing "Dungeons & Dragons"... wizards in that
> > game, prohibited from wearing armor, have a high mortality rate
> > at the low levels... but if they survive they become much more
> > powerful than the other types of character).
>
> Actually, the whole century point system reminds me a bit of a
> role-playing game. However, I don't have a better idea to replace it,
> and I do prefer the idea of a class system based upon merit rather than
> birth.

Actually, if we were going to be strictly historical, placement in the
various classes would be based on wealth (and property ownership), not
birth. Our current system was enacted as a completely modern compromise, and
I fully acknowledge and endorse it as such. A means to encourage, with a
slight (and slight it is) advantage in political leverage, participation in
the political process. None of us (I hope!) thinks that relative wealth
should be the basis on which the classes should be based.

I take exception, though, to the comparison with role-playing games. Our
century point system is in place to reward real-life public service. It has
nothing whatsoever to do with fantasy, or make-believe, or any such thing.
You denegrate all magistrates and all others who devote their time and
energy to our Republic by such a comparison. These are rewards based on real
devotion, longevity, and service. They are by no means "made up".

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 23:33:50 EST

Salve,

Well, I've snipped a Tribune's post to one unfortunate silly remark.

On 1/17/01 8:35 PM Fortunatus (labienus@--------) wrote:

[snip]
>...................................... Currently, there's nothing
>stopping a pair of tribuni from putting forth a plebiscitum that, say,
>forbids patricians from standing for consul. (I would hope, of course,
>that such an injustice would fail to pass.)
>
It wouldn't matter if it did pass - it would have no force. Currently
there is nothing to stop a pair of clowning Tribuni from putting forth a
plebiscitum that would dictate that the sun rise in the West and set in
the East. If you want to look truly silly, why don't you go all the way?

It doesn't fall within the purview of the CPT to set qualifications for
national offices.

I sincerely hope that you and your colleague are not planning to spend
the next 11.5 months clowning like this. Are there no more serious
matters for you to attend to?

Vale,

L. Sergius Aust. Obst.


utinam barbari spatium proprium tuum invadant!

(May barbarians invade your personal space!)

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Basilica
From:	"Caius Flavius Diocletianus" <3s@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 08:28:33 +0100

Salvete Quirites,
Salve Luci Sicini,

(snip)
> I'm making use of some of Mozilla's features to create what will be in
> effect a branded version of Mozilla. The Netscape 6 Browser that was
> released in November is the first Branded version of the Mozilla
> Browser, though IMHO it was released too early, and it still contains
> too many bugs for a final software release.

Thatīs right. I installed the Netscape 6 and had some ugly difficulties :-).

> The first feature of Mozilla that I'm taking advantage of is its
> ability to use custom themes. The shot I posted is a Mozilla theme set
> up for Basilica. Creating the Theme is the hardest part, because
> Mozilla themes consist of hundreds of images controlled by style
> sheets. This theme will be in the program in the form of a .jar file
> so unzipping the .jar will give you the "source code" for the UI which
> consists of the .css files. Limiting the changes to what can be
> handled in a theme will insure that Basilica will remain compatible
> with themes designed for Mozilla. You'll be able to download new
> themes and change the look of the browser.

I think thatīs not the most important feature for me personally. I would be
happy to have your roman theme.

> The second feature is Mozilla's ability to be localized for different
> markets. This is done with language packs which contain all the words
> and phrases that make up the labels, tooltips, menus, etc. The
> language pack also has the built in links and default bookmarks the
> browser uses. Mozilla is set up with US English as the default
> language pack. All I'll need to change in this pack is the default
> links and bookmarks. (Few Romans will be interrested in accessing the
> built in mozilla development links). Optional language packs are being
> developed by outside developers and range from Cherokee (A Native
> American Language) to Chinese, so I'll be needing links to non-english
> roman sites to set up language packs for Basilica in other languages.
> There is one language that is NOT being developed however, Latin. I'll
> definitally need help from some Romans who speak Latin so this will be
> an optional language for Basilica.

Perhaps you may contact Marcus Apollonius Formosanus, since heīs an expert
in Latin. Only a suggestion.

Quirites, you see that our esteemed Lucius Sicinius prepares a real gift for
us and he invests a huge amount of work. We should really think about an
award for him when he completed his work.

Bene Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Praetor

Subject:	[novaroma] Sodalitas Militarium Newsletter
From:	"Caius Flavius Diocletianus" <3s@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 08:52:28 +0100

Salvete, Quirites.

I published the newsletter on the Sodalitas Militarium Website. You find the newsletter archive by calling the URL

www.diocletian.de/sodmil/ ( go to the main page and select "newsletter").

To call the newsletter archive out of the frame structure please use the URL

www.diocletian.de/sodmil/news/


Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Praetor
Adiutoris Retarius Praefectus, Sodalitas Militarium


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

Subject:	[novaroma] Return to action
From:	Craig Stevenson <dougies@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:35:29 +1030

Ave all,

I'm back again! I've just received a fairly clean bill of health (even
though that bill was extremely large:-) ), and have been told that I
will now be able to go on with my duties as per normal, though it may
take a while for me to catch up on things as they occur, as well as the
backlog of e-mails Lucius Sentius wouldn't read to me.

Anyway, it's great to be back!

Valete bene all,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:20:19 -0600 (CST)

Salve Flavi Vedi,

> I take exception, though, to the comparison with role-playing games. Our
> century point system is in place to reward real-life public service. It has
> nothing whatsoever to do with fantasy, or make-believe, or any such thing.

That reference was mine, not Labienus', and I apologize for the
frivolity.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:27:03 -0600 (CST)

Salve Luci Sergi,

> It wouldn't matter if it did pass - it would have no force. Currently
> there is nothing to stop a pair of clowning Tribuni from putting forth a
> plebiscitum that would dictate that the sun rise in the West and set in
> the East. If you want to look truly silly, why don't you go all the way?
>
> I sincerely hope that you and your colleague are not planning to spend
> the next 11.5 months clowning like this. Are there no more serious
> matters for you to attend to?

They *are* attending to serious matters... no one was seriously proposing
the above, the current senior tribune was merely giving an example of
an extremely unconstitutional plebiscite that one of his successors might
someday attempt.

I think that if such a proposal ever was put before the Comitia, the
Senate would appoint a Dictator who would quickly expel the traitor(s)
and issue edicts forbidding such things from ever happening again.

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator

Subject:	[novaroma] re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 08:57:28 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: L. Sicinius Drusus [mailto:drusus@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:09 PM
>
> Some have argued that in the intrest of fairness laws should be bought
> before the People rather than the Plebes. I concur that it would be
> fair to have all the people vote on laws, however the Tribunes of the
> Plebes lack the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to meet. They
> are limited to working with the Comita Plebis Tributa. If we accept
> the view that all laws should be passed by the Comitia Populi Tributa,
> then we have greatly weakened the powers of the Tribunes.

Bear in mind, the powers of the Tribunes are already weakened in our modern
reconstruction because the group which the Tribunes were historically
developed to counterbalance-- the Patricians-- is nearly emasculated (as our
good Tribune reminded us yesterday). The question before us now is, are the
Tribunes weakened _enough_ to make up for the complete lack of
counterbalancing power of the Patricians?

> They would
> be limited to going hat in hand begging for the Comitia Populi to be
> called on, rather than summoning the the Comitia Plebis. While I have
> no doubt that our present Consuls and Praetors would not hesitate to
> honor such a request from the Tribunes, the day could come when we
> have Consuls and Praetors with less intregity, who might refuse the
> request. It's better to firmly establish the precedents now.

I completely agree; let us establish the precedents now. Let the precident
be that _all_ the people are allowed to discuss, debate, and finally vote on
issues which pertain to them. Let the precedent be that only in the face of
the most recalcitrant and obstructionist Consul that the Comitia Plebis
Tributa needs to be called to pass necessary and vital legislation. But let
us _not_ establish the precident that a fraction of the population
steamrolls over the rest, merely because the Tribunes are wanting for
something to do. That would be a most unfortunate precident to set.

Remember, in a perfect world, the Tribunes would be idle 99% of the time;
they should (indeed, must) act when injustices are being perpetrated, and
rights abused. If the other magistrates are doing their jobs, the Tribunes
should let them do so.

> If the
> Patricians wish to vote on laws the Tribunes want enacted, Then I
> sugest that rather than making sugestions that have the effect of
> limiting the powers of the Tribunes, they use thier influance in the
> Comitia Centuria and the Senate to amend the Constitution so that the
> Tribunes would have the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to
> meet.

I am forced to ask why you feel it is so important that the Tribunes be the
magistrates who lead initiatives in legislation, rather than the Consuls. Do
you feel that somehow the Tribunes would be inherently more fair than the
Consuls in bringing legislation? If so, I would be eager to hear your
reasoning. If anything, it seems to me that the Consuls, who represent _all_
of Nova Roma, would be better suited to taking the lead on legislation which
impacts both Patricians and Plebeians alike. Certainly, the Tribunes need
the power to do so in extremis, but on day-to-day matters the Consuls should
carry the legislative ball, and do so in the Comitia Populi Tributa.

> During most of the history of
> Respublica Roma there were only two ways to become a Patrician. To be
> born a Patrician, or to adopted as the son of a Patrician. New
> Citizens NEVER were accepted into the Ordo Patricius.

I think your argument is a good one on its face, but suffers from a
misunderstanding of just how gens membership is handled in Nova Roma. When a
new Citizen applies for membership in an already-existing gens, and is
approved, that paterfamilias is in effect adopting that new Citizen as a son
or daughter. It's not the same as a newly-freed slave joining a family; it
really is adoption. (Although if you can come up with a workable mechanism
that allows us to have gentes with both Patrician and Plebeian members, I
would be more than happy to discuss it!)

Personally, I happen to agree with you; I think that gentes (both Patrician
and Plebeian) are far too eager to adopt new Citizens. That's why gens Vedia
has never accepted new Citizens as members; there's no way I am going to
adopt someone I don't know personally. But unless you're proposing that we
somehow put curbs on the power of the Paterfamiliae to adopt new sons and
daughters, I don't see what's to be done about it.

> According to Livy one of the Centuries was for the head
> count. If we applied the same princeples to the Centuries as we do to
> the tribes, we could assign all citizens who fail to vote to the Capti
> Censi as well as to the Urban tribes. This would't have any effect on
> thier points, and they could regain thier place in the classes by
> voting this December. It would open up places in the higher classes
> for those who are active though.

Now _this_ is an interesting idea! Can you dig up an exact reference for it?
On what basis were Citizens in Roma Antiqua assigned to this "head count"
Century? Was it merely all those who didn't meet the minimum property
requirements for the rest of the Centuries, or was there some other
criterion? Was it considered part of one of the five classes, or was it some
sort of supernumerary century? How do you see this impacting the problem of
already-undersized Centuries; wouldn't it just exaccerbate it?

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	[novaroma] Need a little help with something...
From:	Publius Gramatinicus Albinus <syphax_venaliccii@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 06:35:10 -0800 (PST)

i dont know whether this would be a gross mis-use of
this forum, but I have little choice.
In school, my latin club has officers, named so in the
way of the Romans. Consul, Praetor, Quaestor, Aedile,
Censor and a Tribunus. if there is anyone out there
that is able to give me an excellent definition of
those offices(for those who do not know about Roman
politics), I would be indebted to you.





=====
pax et lux,
Publius Gramatinicus Albinus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:23:05 -0500

Salvete;

Before commenting on the particular plebiscita the Tribunes intend to bring
before the Comitia Plebis Tributa this weekend, I would like to make a more
general point on procedure. Personally, I find it astonishing that the
Tribunes would craft such legislation with nary a word of input from the
People. As far as I can tell, there has been no discussion whatsoever on any
of the topics covered, either in public here on the main email list or on
the CPT list. I cannot say where the ideas for your proposed plebiscita came
from, but they sure didn't originate in free and open discussion.

As one engaged in the crafting of legislation myself, I would offer the
Tribunes a free word of advice; input from the public is invaluable _before_
drafting such proposals, while even still formulating broad principles. The
discussions I and others have initiated here have been more than worthwhile
in finding out what the will of the People is, which can then be turned into
legislative proposals. You are certainly within your legal rights to drop
such bombshells in the laps of the voters at the last minute, but I hardly
think it is a good precident to set.

Also, as an aside, my comments are necessarily based on the somewhat vague
summaries of the various plebiscita offered. When (if?) the actual drafts of
the plebiscita are made available, my commentary may be amended accordingly.

> > EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS
> >
> > Salvete Quirites
> >
> > The following plebiscita shall be placed before the Comitia Plebis
> > Tributa on 19 January 2754 AUC, to be voted on beginning 20 January 2754
> > AUC until Midnight Roma 30 January 2754 AUC. Below are descriptions of
> > the plebiscita, full texts will be posted to the Comitia Plebis Tributa
> > list on Friday 19 January 2754 AUC at Roma (Thursday 18 January 2754 AUC
> > US).
> >
> >
> > I. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates
> >
> > Defines the honors, responsibilities, and duties of the Tribunes of the
> > Plebeians under IV.A.7 with regard to tibunician powers of intercesso,
> > calling of the Comitia Plebis Tributa and Senate, auxilium, assertum,
and
> > coercito; authority to issue nuntio, denuntio, rescriptae and responsae;
> > and authority to appoint Plebeian scribae, curatores, and viatores.

The section of the Constitution which you reference is quite specific
regarding the "honors, powers, and responsibilities" of the Tribunes.
Nowhere in that paragraph (or any other) is listed such things as auxilium,
assertum, coercito, nuntio, denuntio, rescriptae, or responsae. Nor are the
Tribunes accorded the authority to appoint scribae (a power which is
specifically spelled out for other magistrates, and specifically _not_
listed for Tribunes).

I am all in favor of specifying how the powers of the Tribunes (as listed in
the Constitution) should be employed. Such is a necessary function of laws
and plebiscita. But it sounds here as if you are attempting to add _new_
powers to the office of Tribune beyond those stipulated by the Constitution.
That is something that you cannot do; only the Comitia Centuriata (with the
later consent of the Senate) may alter the Constitution. I am more than a
little troubled that those magistrates charged with maintaining the
integrity of our Constitution are seemingly willing to play so "fast and
loose" when it comes to their _own_ powers.

> > II. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis
> Tributorum,
> > Pass/Fail
> >
> > Replaces the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitia Plebis Tributa and
establishes
> > new procedures for the comitia to follow in regard to voting on
> > candidates for Plebeian offices and plebiscita. Reference to III.C.1 and
> > 2.

No problem. The Comitia Plebis Tributa should of course define its own
internal voting procedures and mechanisms. I am glad the Tribunes have ideas
on how this should be done (although I am once again curious as to why these
ideas are being imposed from on high, rather than having input sought from
the People in fair and open fora).

> > III. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia, Pass/Fail
> >
> > Reaffirmation of the Lex Publilia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) that a call for
> > assembly of the Comitia Plebis Tributa may be made without prior patrum
> > auctoris or auspicia. Reference to III.C and IV.A.7.

As long as exception is made for the Constitutionally-mandated right of
nuntiatio, and in the absence of any specifics, this seems a
not-unreasonable matter.

> > IV. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia, Pass/Fail
> >
> > Reaffirms the Lex Icilia of 259 AUC (471 c.e.) prohibiting any
> > magistrate from interferring or disrupting the calling forth or
> > procedures taken within the Comitia Plebis Tributa. Reference toII.B.3,
> > and III.C.1 and 2. .

Without seeing the specifics, it is impossible to tell if this proposal
would trample the Constitutional rights of magistrates. Would it, for
example, include a Dictator? Would a Praetor pointing out a procedural flaw
that invalidated a vote come under its provisions and thus be silenced or
censured? If the curator araneum cannot accomodate a particular voting
schedule for technical reasons, would he be disciplined? What exact sorts of
interference or disruption would fall under its auspices?

> > V. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia, Pass/Fail
> >
> > Reaffirms the Lex Caecilia Didia of 655 AUC (98 c.e.) prohibitng any
> > disparate provisions made between Nova Roma cives in any leges,
> > plebiscita, edicta, making exceptions for decreta of the Collegium
> > Pontificum and the Collegium Augurum, and the incorporating regula of
> > sodalitates. With reference to Section II.A.3; and II.B

What, precisely, is meant by "disparate provisions"? Between Patricians and
Plebeians? Magistrates and non-Magistrates? Men and women? Experienced and
inexperienced? Young and old? This is, unfortunately, too vague to
definitively comment on.

> > VI. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria, Pass/Fail
> >
> > Reaffirms Lev Ovinia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) clarifying and defining
terms
> > used for the procedures in the provisions of the Lex Vedia Senatoria
> > with regard to IV.A.1d, IV.A.2.c and V.A on the elevation of "all the
> > best men and women of all ranks and orders" to the Senate as "the
> > repository of experience and wisdom."

It sounds as if you are trying to redefine the qualifications for Senate
membership. Surely this is an issue that all of the People-- Patrician and
Plebeian alike-- should not only vote on, but discuss beforehand? Perhaps
the Senate itself should be consulted? I must say this smacks of an attempt
to "stack" the Senate, and the fact that it is being done in such a
back-room manner should raise apprehensions from all of our Citizens.

> > VII. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia,
> > Pass/Fail
> >
> > Reaffirms the Lex Canuleia of 308 AUC (445 c.e.) establishing rights of
> > all cives, regardless of their orders, to engage in conuptia and
> > confarreatio. Ensuring civil rights of Section II.B. 1 and 6.

I must say that, while this seems a good thing on the face of it, it is a
bit incongruous. Has there been a rash of wedding-banning of which I have
remained unaware? This is certainly dropping out of nowhere! I do, however,
think that this is exactly the sort of thing that needs to be discussed and
voted on by _all_ the people, not merely a fraction thereof. Indeed, it
seems a good item to be included in the larger work of the civil law code
and procedure which is even now being worked on (by a group including our
Tribunes, I'll add!), rather than just plunked down on its own for seemingly
no reason.

I look forward to reading the details of the proposed plebiscita, so a
substantive and detailed discussion (which has hitherto been non-existant)
may take place. I only wish the Tribunes had seen fit to do so earlier,
rather than rushing to call a vote on these "hidden" proposals they have
concocted in an apparent vaccuum.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 09:32:53 -0600 (CST)

> Bear in mind, the powers of the Tribunes are already weakened in our modern
> reconstruction because the group which the Tribunes were historically
> developed to counterbalance-- the Patricians-- is nearly emasculated

Indeed... I don't think there's a single millionaire (with hundreds of
clients) among us!

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:39:27 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus"
<germa--------s@--------> wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: L. Sicinius Drusus [mailto:drusus@--------]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:09 PM
> >
> > Some have argued that in the intrest of fairness laws should be
bought
> > before the People rather than the Plebes. I concur that it would
be
> > fair to have all the people vote on laws, however the Tribunes of
the
> > Plebes lack the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to meet.
They
> > are limited to working with the Comita Plebis Tributa. If we
accept
> > the view that all laws should be passed by the Comitia Populi
Tributa,
> > then we have greatly weakened the powers of the Tribunes.
>
> Bear in mind, the powers of the Tribunes are already weakened in our
modern
> reconstruction because the group which the Tribunes were
historically
> developed to counterbalance-- the Patricians-- is nearly emasculated
(as our
> good Tribune reminded us yesterday). The question before us now is,
are the
> Tribunes weakened _enough_ to make up for the complete lack of
> counterbalancing power of the Patricians?
>
> > They would
> > be limited to going hat in hand begging for the Comitia Populi to
be
> > called on, rather than summoning the the Comitia Plebis. While I
have
> > no doubt that our present Consuls and Praetors would not hesitate
to
> > honor such a request from the Tribunes, the day could come when we
> > have Consuls and Praetors with less intregity, who might refuse
the
> > request. It's better to firmly establish the precedents now.
>
> I completely agree; let us establish the precedents now. Let the
precident
> be that _all_ the people are allowed to discuss, debate, and finally
vote on
> issues which pertain to them. Let the precedent be that only in the
face of
> the most recalcitrant and obstructionist Consul that the Comitia
Plebis
> Tributa needs to be called to pass necessary and vital legislation.
But let
> us _not_ establish the precident that a fraction of the population
> steamrolls over the rest, merely because the Tribunes are wanting
for
> something to do. That would be a most unfortunate precident to set.
>
> Remember, in a perfect world, the Tribunes would be idle 99% of the
time;
> they should (indeed, must) act when injustices are being
perpetrated, and
> rights abused. If the other magistrates are doing their jobs, the
Tribunes
> should let them do so.
>
> > If the
> > Patricians wish to vote on laws the Tribunes want enacted, Then I
> > sugest that rather than making sugestions that have the effect of
> > limiting the powers of the Tribunes, they use thier influance in
the
> > Comitia Centuria and the Senate to amend the Constitution so that
the
> > Tribunes would have the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa
to
> > meet.
>
> I am forced to ask why you feel it is so important that the Tribunes
be the
> magistrates who lead initiatives in legislation, rather than the
Consuls. Do
> you feel that somehow the Tribunes would be inherently more fair
than the
> Consuls in bringing legislation? If so, I would be eager to hear
your
> reasoning. If anything, it seems to me that the Consuls, who
represent _all_
> of Nova Roma, would be better suited to taking the lead on
legislation which
> impacts both Patricians and Plebeians alike. Certainly, the Tribunes
need
> the power to do so in extremis, but on day-to-day matters the
Consuls should
> carry the legislative ball, and do so in the Comitia Populi Tributa.
>
> > During most of the history of
> > Respublica Roma there were only two ways to become a Patrician. To
be
> > born a Patrician, or to adopted as the son of a Patrician. New
> > Citizens NEVER were accepted into the Ordo Patricius.
>
> I think your argument is a good one on its face, but suffers from a
> misunderstanding of just how gens membership is handled in Nova
Roma. When a
> new Citizen applies for membership in an already-existing gens, and
is
> approved, that paterfamilias is in effect adopting that new Citizen
as a son
> or daughter. It's not the same as a newly-freed slave joining a
family; it
> really is adoption. (Although if you can come up with a workable
mechanism
> that allows us to have gentes with both Patrician and Plebeian
members, I
> would be more than happy to discuss it!)
>
> Personally, I happen to agree with you; I think that gentes (both
Patrician
> and Plebeian) are far too eager to adopt new Citizens. That's why
gens Vedia
> has never accepted new Citizens as members; there's no way I am
going to
> adopt someone I don't know personally. But unless you're proposing
that we
> somehow put curbs on the power of the Paterfamiliae to adopt new
sons and
> daughters, I don't see what's to be done about it.
>
> > According to Livy one of the Centuries was for the head
> > count. If we applied the same princeples to the Centuries as we do
to
> > the tribes, we could assign all citizens who fail to vote to the
Capti
> > Censi as well as to the Urban tribes. This would't have any effect
on
> > thier points, and they could regain thier place in the classes by
> > voting this December. It would open up places in the higher
classes
> > for those who are active though.
>
> Now _this_ is an interesting idea! Can you dig up an exact reference
for it?
> On what basis were Citizens in Roma Antiqua assigned to this "head
count"
> Century? Was it merely all those who didn't meet the minimum
property
> requirements for the rest of the Centuries, or was there some other
> criterion? Was it considered part of one of the five classes, or was
it some
> sort of supernumerary century? How do you see this impacting the
problem of
> already-undersized Centuries; wouldn't it just exaccerbate it?
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
> email: germa--------s@-------- > AIM: Flavius Vedius
> www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Salve, Flavius Vedius,

It's a busy day at work, so I''l have to wait to give you a full
response. I did want to send a link that discusses the classes and the
centuries as described by Livy.

http://myron.sjsu.edu/romeweb/discussion/government/early_government.h
tm

Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	Craig Stevenson <dougies@-------->
Date:	Fri, 19 Jan 2001 01:58:18 +1030

Ave Flavius Vedius,

How can you mean that this is sort of thing is not brought up for discussion by the
whole people? Maybe not at this point in time, but the current tribunes are
creating a way in which these laws can be viewed by the whole people.

Valete bene,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:

> Salvete;
>
> Before commenting on the particular plebiscita the Tribunes intend to bring
> before the Comitia Plebis Tributa this weekend, I would like to make a more
> general point on procedure. Personally, I find it astonishing that the
> Tribunes would craft such legislation with nary a word of input from the
> People. As far as I can tell, there has been no discussion whatsoever on any
> of the topics covered, either in public here on the main email list or on
> the CPT list. I cannot say where the ideas for your proposed plebiscita came
> from, but they sure didn't originate in free and open discussion.
>
> As one engaged in the crafting of legislation myself, I would offer the
> Tribunes a free word of advice; input from the public is invaluable _before_
> drafting such proposals, while even still formulating broad principles. The
> discussions I and others have initiated here have been more than worthwhile
> in finding out what the will of the People is, which can then be turned into
> legislative proposals. You are certainly within your legal rights to drop
> such bombshells in the laps of the voters at the last minute, but I hardly
> think it is a good precident to set.
>
> Also, as an aside, my comments are necessarily based on the somewhat vague
> summaries of the various plebiscita offered. When (if?) the actual drafts of
> the plebiscita are made available, my commentary may be amended accordingly.
>
> > > EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS
> > >
> > > Salvete Quirites
> > >
> > > The following plebiscita shall be placed before the Comitia Plebis
> > > Tributa on 19 January 2754 AUC, to be voted on beginning 20 January 2754
> > > AUC until Midnight Roma 30 January 2754 AUC. Below are descriptions of
> > > the plebiscita, full texts will be posted to the Comitia Plebis Tributa
> > > list on Friday 19 January 2754 AUC at Roma (Thursday 18 January 2754 AUC
> > > US).
> > >
> > >
> > > I. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates
> > >
> > > Defines the honors, responsibilities, and duties of the Tribunes of the
> > > Plebeians under IV.A.7 with regard to tibunician powers of intercesso,
> > > calling of the Comitia Plebis Tributa and Senate, auxilium, assertum,
> and
> > > coercito; authority to issue nuntio, denuntio, rescriptae and responsae;
> > > and authority to appoint Plebeian scribae, curatores, and viatores.
>
> The section of the Constitution which you reference is quite specific
> regarding the "honors, powers, and responsibilities" of the Tribunes.
> Nowhere in that paragraph (or any other) is listed such things as auxilium,
> assertum, coercito, nuntio, denuntio, rescriptae, or responsae. Nor are the
> Tribunes accorded the authority to appoint scribae (a power which is
> specifically spelled out for other magistrates, and specifically _not_
> listed for Tribunes).
>
> I am all in favor of specifying how the powers of the Tribunes (as listed in
> the Constitution) should be employed. Such is a necessary function of laws
> and plebiscita. But it sounds here as if you are attempting to add _new_
> powers to the office of Tribune beyond those stipulated by the Constitution.
> That is something that you cannot do; only the Comitia Centuriata (with the
> later consent of the Senate) may alter the Constitution. I am more than a
> little troubled that those magistrates charged with maintaining the
> integrity of our Constitution are seemingly willing to play so "fast and
> loose" when it comes to their _own_ powers.
>
> > > II. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis
> > Tributorum,
> > > Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Replaces the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitia Plebis Tributa and
> establishes
> > > new procedures for the comitia to follow in regard to voting on
> > > candidates for Plebeian offices and plebiscita. Reference to III.C.1 and
> > > 2.
>
> No problem. The Comitia Plebis Tributa should of course define its own
> internal voting procedures and mechanisms. I am glad the Tribunes have ideas
> on how this should be done (although I am once again curious as to why these
> ideas are being imposed from on high, rather than having input sought from
> the People in fair and open fora).
>
> > > III. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia, Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Reaffirmation of the Lex Publilia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) that a call for
> > > assembly of the Comitia Plebis Tributa may be made without prior patrum
> > > auctoris or auspicia. Reference to III.C and IV.A.7.
>
> As long as exception is made for the Constitutionally-mandated right of
> nuntiatio, and in the absence of any specifics, this seems a
> not-unreasonable matter.
>
> > > IV. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia, Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Reaffirms the Lex Icilia of 259 AUC (471 c.e.) prohibiting any
> > > magistrate from interferring or disrupting the calling forth or
> > > procedures taken within the Comitia Plebis Tributa. Reference toII.B.3,
> > > and III.C.1 and 2. .
>
> Without seeing the specifics, it is impossible to tell if this proposal
> would trample the Constitutional rights of magistrates. Would it, for
> example, include a Dictator? Would a Praetor pointing out a procedural flaw
> that invalidated a vote come under its provisions and thus be silenced or
> censured? If the curator araneum cannot accomodate a particular voting
> schedule for technical reasons, would he be disciplined? What exact sorts of
> interference or disruption would fall under its auspices?
>
> > > V. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia, Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Reaffirms the Lex Caecilia Didia of 655 AUC (98 c.e.) prohibitng any
> > > disparate provisions made between Nova Roma cives in any leges,
> > > plebiscita, edicta, making exceptions for decreta of the Collegium
> > > Pontificum and the Collegium Augurum, and the incorporating regula of
> > > sodalitates. With reference to Section II.A.3; and II.B
>
> What, precisely, is meant by "disparate provisions"? Between Patricians and
> Plebeians? Magistrates and non-Magistrates? Men and women? Experienced and
> inexperienced? Young and old? This is, unfortunately, too vague to
> definitively comment on.
>
> > > VI. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria, Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Reaffirms Lev Ovinia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) clarifying and defining
> terms
> > > used for the procedures in the provisions of the Lex Vedia Senatoria
> > > with regard to IV.A.1d, IV.A.2.c and V.A on the elevation of "all the
> > > best men and women of all ranks and orders" to the Senate as "the
> > > repository of experience and wisdom."
>
> It sounds as if you are trying to redefine the qualifications for Senate
> membership. Surely this is an issue that all of the People-- Patrician and
> Plebeian alike-- should not only vote on, but discuss beforehand? Perhaps
> the Senate itself should be consulted? I must say this smacks of an attempt
> to "stack" the Senate, and the fact that it is being done in such a
> back-room manner should raise apprehensions from all of our Citizens.
>
> > > VII. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia,
> > > Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Reaffirms the Lex Canuleia of 308 AUC (445 c.e.) establishing rights of
> > > all cives, regardless of their orders, to engage in conuptia and
> > > confarreatio. Ensuring civil rights of Section II.B. 1 and 6.
>
> I must say that, while this seems a good thing on the face of it, it is a
> bit incongruous. Has there been a rash of wedding-banning of which I have
> remained unaware? This is certainly dropping out of nowhere! I do, however,
> think that this is exactly the sort of thing that needs to be discussed and
> voted on by _all_ the people, not merely a fraction thereof. Indeed, it
> seems a good item to be included in the larger work of the civil law code
> and procedure which is even now being worked on (by a group including our
> Tribunes, I'll add!), rather than just plunked down on its own for seemingly
> no reason.
>
> I look forward to reading the details of the proposed plebiscita, so a
> substantive and detailed discussion (which has hitherto been non-existant)
> may take place. I only wish the Tribunes had seen fit to do so earlier,
> rather than rushing to call a vote on these "hidden" proposals they have
> concocted in an apparent vaccuum.
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
> email: germanicus@--------
> AIM: Flavius Vedius
> www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 06:13:22 -0800

Ave

That link doesn't work! Do you have another or is it typed correctly?

L. Cornelius Sulla Felix


"L. Sicinius Drusus" wrote:

> --- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus"
> <germa--------s@--------> wrote: > > Salvete;
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: L. Sicinius Drusus [mailto:drusus@--------]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:09 PM
> > >
> > > Some have argued that in the intrest of fairness laws should be
> bought
> > > before the People rather than the Plebes. I concur that it would
> be
> > > fair to have all the people vote on laws, however the Tribunes of
> the
> > > Plebes lack the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to meet.
> They
> > > are limited to working with the Comita Plebis Tributa. If we
> accept
> > > the view that all laws should be passed by the Comitia Populi
> Tributa,
> > > then we have greatly weakened the powers of the Tribunes.
> >
> > Bear in mind, the powers of the Tribunes are already weakened in our
> modern
> > reconstruction because the group which the Tribunes were
> historically
> > developed to counterbalance-- the Patricians-- is nearly emasculated
> (as our
> > good Tribune reminded us yesterday). The question before us now is,
> are the
> > Tribunes weakened _enough_ to make up for the complete lack of
> > counterbalancing power of the Patricians?
> >
> > > They would
> > > be limited to going hat in hand begging for the Comitia Populi to
> be
> > > called on, rather than summoning the the Comitia Plebis. While I
> have
> > > no doubt that our present Consuls and Praetors would not hesitate
> to
> > > honor such a request from the Tribunes, the day could come when we
> > > have Consuls and Praetors with less intregity, who might refuse
> the
> > > request. It's better to firmly establish the precedents now.
> >
> > I completely agree; let us establish the precedents now. Let the
> precident
> > be that _all_ the people are allowed to discuss, debate, and finally
> vote on
> > issues which pertain to them. Let the precedent be that only in the
> face of
> > the most recalcitrant and obstructionist Consul that the Comitia
> Plebis
> > Tributa needs to be called to pass necessary and vital legislation.
> But let
> > us _not_ establish the precident that a fraction of the population
> > steamrolls over the rest, merely because the Tribunes are wanting
> for
> > something to do. That would be a most unfortunate precident to set.
> >
> > Remember, in a perfect world, the Tribunes would be idle 99% of the
> time;
> > they should (indeed, must) act when injustices are being
> perpetrated, and
> > rights abused. If the other magistrates are doing their jobs, the
> Tribunes
> > should let them do so.
> >
> > > If the
> > > Patricians wish to vote on laws the Tribunes want enacted, Then I
> > > sugest that rather than making sugestions that have the effect of
> > > limiting the powers of the Tribunes, they use thier influance in
> the
> > > Comitia Centuria and the Senate to amend the Constitution so that
> the
> > > Tribunes would have the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa
> to
> > > meet.
> >
> > I am forced to ask why you feel it is so important that the Tribunes
> be the
> > magistrates who lead initiatives in legislation, rather than the
> Consuls. Do
> > you feel that somehow the Tribunes would be inherently more fair
> than the
> > Consuls in bringing legislation? If so, I would be eager to hear
> your
> > reasoning. If anything, it seems to me that the Consuls, who
> represent _all_
> > of Nova Roma, would be better suited to taking the lead on
> legislation which
> > impacts both Patricians and Plebeians alike. Certainly, the Tribunes
> need
> > the power to do so in extremis, but on day-to-day matters the
> Consuls should
> > carry the legislative ball, and do so in the Comitia Populi Tributa.
> >
> > > During most of the history of
> > > Respublica Roma there were only two ways to become a Patrician. To
> be
> > > born a Patrician, or to adopted as the son of a Patrician. New
> > > Citizens NEVER were accepted into the Ordo Patricius.
> >
> > I think your argument is a good one on its face, but suffers from a
> > misunderstanding of just how gens membership is handled in Nova
> Roma. When a
> > new Citizen applies for membership in an already-existing gens, and
> is
> > approved, that paterfamilias is in effect adopting that new Citizen
> as a son
> > or daughter. It's not the same as a newly-freed slave joining a
> family; it
> > really is adoption. (Although if you can come up with a workable
> mechanism
> > that allows us to have gentes with both Patrician and Plebeian
> members, I
> > would be more than happy to discuss it!)
> >
> > Personally, I happen to agree with you; I think that gentes (both
> Patrician
> > and Plebeian) are far too eager to adopt new Citizens. That's why
> gens Vedia
> > has never accepted new Citizens as members; there's no way I am
> going to
> > adopt someone I don't know personally. But unless you're proposing
> that we
> > somehow put curbs on the power of the Paterfamiliae to adopt new
> sons and
> > daughters, I don't see what's to be done about it.
> >
> > > According to Livy one of the Centuries was for the head
> > > count. If we applied the same princeples to the Centuries as we do
> to
> > > the tribes, we could assign all citizens who fail to vote to the
> Capti
> > > Censi as well as to the Urban tribes. This would't have any effect
> on
> > > thier points, and they could regain thier place in the classes by
> > > voting this December. It would open up places in the higher
> classes
> > > for those who are active though.
> >
> > Now _this_ is an interesting idea! Can you dig up an exact reference
> for it?
> > On what basis were Citizens in Roma Antiqua assigned to this "head
> count"
> > Century? Was it merely all those who didn't meet the minimum
> property
> > requirements for the rest of the Centuries, or was there some other
> > criterion? Was it considered part of one of the five classes, or was
> it some
> > sort of supernumerary century? How do you see this impacting the
> problem of
> > already-undersized Centuries; wouldn't it just exaccerbate it?
> >
> > Valete,
> >
> > Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> > Consul
> >
> > email: germa--------s@-------- > > AIM: Flavius Vedius
> > www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
>
> Salve, Flavius Vedius,
>
> It's a busy day at work, so I''l have to wait to give you a full
> response. I did want to send a link that discusses the classes and the
> centuries as described by Livy.
>
> http://myron.sjsu.edu/romeweb/discussion/government/early_government.h
> tm
>
> Vale,
> L. Sicinius Drusus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:00:21 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig Stevenson [mailto:dougies@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 10:28
>
> How can you mean that this is sort of thing is not brought up for
discussion by the
> whole people? Maybe not at this point in time, but the current tribunes
are
> creating a way in which these laws can be viewed by the whole people.

I mean the general concepts have not even been broached either here or on
the CBT list, and yet the Tribunes are proposing plebiscita. Has there been
a discussion anywhere about the means and methods by which the Comitia
Plebis Tributa should meet and vote? Has there been a discussion anywhere
about expanding the powers of the Tribunes? Has there been a discussion
anywhere about the need to spell out that Plebeians and Patricians can
marry?

No. The Tribunes have seemingly decided everything on their own, and have
dropped it in the laps of the voters fully formed. (Not even; we STILL don't
know the exact wording of any of the proposed plebiscita!) I say this is not
a good way to conduct business, and that getting input and ideas from the
People is far preferable.

And, if I may, there already exists a "way in which these laws can be viewed
by the whole people". It's called the main email list. There is no need for
the Tribunes to create a new vehicle for such (not that they bothered to
_ask_ anyone else-- even the Plebeians themselves-- if they should create
it!).

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:03:11 US/Central

Salve L Sergi

> It wouldn't matter if it did pass - it would have no force. Currently
> there is nothing to stop a pair of clowning Tribuni from putting forth a
> plebiscitum that would dictate that the sun rise in the West and set in
> the East. If you want to look truly silly, why don't you go all the way?

Sigh. My example was deliberately extreme and absurd, purely in order to
illustrate the point. It's a common ploy when making an argument, and I rather
expect that you have used it in the past yourself.

> It doesn't fall within the purview of the CPT to set qualifications for
> national offices.

Actually, it does, both historically and in Nova Roma.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 06:29:34 -0800

scratch that...I got it working.. ;)

Sulla Felix


Lucius Cornelius Sulla wrote:

> Ave
>
> That link doesn't work! Do you have another or is it typed correctly?
>
> L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> "L. Sicinius Drusus" wrote:
>
> > --- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus"
> > <germa--------s@--------> wrote: > > > Salvete;
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: L. Sicinius Drusus [mailto:drusus@--------]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:09 PM
> > > >
> > > > Some have argued that in the intrest of fairness laws should be
> > bought
> > > > before the People rather than the Plebes. I concur that it would
> > be
> > > > fair to have all the people vote on laws, however the Tribunes of
> > the
> > > > Plebes lack the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to meet.
> > They
> > > > are limited to working with the Comita Plebis Tributa. If we
> > accept
> > > > the view that all laws should be passed by the Comitia Populi
> > Tributa,
> > > > then we have greatly weakened the powers of the Tribunes.
> > >
> > > Bear in mind, the powers of the Tribunes are already weakened in our
> > modern
> > > reconstruction because the group which the Tribunes were
> > historically
> > > developed to counterbalance-- the Patricians-- is nearly emasculated
> > (as our
> > > good Tribune reminded us yesterday). The question before us now is,
> > are the
> > > Tribunes weakened _enough_ to make up for the complete lack of
> > > counterbalancing power of the Patricians?
> > >
> > > > They would
> > > > be limited to going hat in hand begging for the Comitia Populi to
> > be
> > > > called on, rather than summoning the the Comitia Plebis. While I
> > have
> > > > no doubt that our present Consuls and Praetors would not hesitate
> > to
> > > > honor such a request from the Tribunes, the day could come when we
> > > > have Consuls and Praetors with less intregity, who might refuse
> > the
> > > > request. It's better to firmly establish the precedents now.
> > >
> > > I completely agree; let us establish the precedents now. Let the
> > precident
> > > be that _all_ the people are allowed to discuss, debate, and finally
> > vote on
> > > issues which pertain to them. Let the precedent be that only in the
> > face of
> > > the most recalcitrant and obstructionist Consul that the Comitia
> > Plebis
> > > Tributa needs to be called to pass necessary and vital legislation.
> > But let
> > > us _not_ establish the precident that a fraction of the population
> > > steamrolls over the rest, merely because the Tribunes are wanting
> > for
> > > something to do. That would be a most unfortunate precident to set.
> > >
> > > Remember, in a perfect world, the Tribunes would be idle 99% of the
> > time;
> > > they should (indeed, must) act when injustices are being
> > perpetrated, and
> > > rights abused. If the other magistrates are doing their jobs, the
> > Tribunes
> > > should let them do so.
> > >
> > > > If the
> > > > Patricians wish to vote on laws the Tribunes want enacted, Then I
> > > > sugest that rather than making sugestions that have the effect of
> > > > limiting the powers of the Tribunes, they use thier influance in
> > the
> > > > Comitia Centuria and the Senate to amend the Constitution so that
> > the
> > > > Tribunes would have the power to call the Comitia Populi Tributa
> > to
> > > > meet.
> > >
> > > I am forced to ask why you feel it is so important that the Tribunes
> > be the
> > > magistrates who lead initiatives in legislation, rather than the
> > Consuls. Do
> > > you feel that somehow the Tribunes would be inherently more fair
> > than the
> > > Consuls in bringing legislation? If so, I would be eager to hear
> > your
> > > reasoning. If anything, it seems to me that the Consuls, who
> > represent _all_
> > > of Nova Roma, would be better suited to taking the lead on
> > legislation which
> > > impacts both Patricians and Plebeians alike. Certainly, the Tribunes
> > need
> > > the power to do so in extremis, but on day-to-day matters the
> > Consuls should
> > > carry the legislative ball, and do so in the Comitia Populi Tributa.
> > >
> > > > During most of the history of
> > > > Respublica Roma there were only two ways to become a Patrician. To
> > be
> > > > born a Patrician, or to adopted as the son of a Patrician. New
> > > > Citizens NEVER were accepted into the Ordo Patricius.
> > >
> > > I think your argument is a good one on its face, but suffers from a
> > > misunderstanding of just how gens membership is handled in Nova
> > Roma. When a
> > > new Citizen applies for membership in an already-existing gens, and
> > is
> > > approved, that paterfamilias is in effect adopting that new Citizen
> > as a son
> > > or daughter. It's not the same as a newly-freed slave joining a
> > family; it
> > > really is adoption. (Although if you can come up with a workable
> > mechanism
> > > that allows us to have gentes with both Patrician and Plebeian
> > members, I
> > > would be more than happy to discuss it!)
> > >
> > > Personally, I happen to agree with you; I think that gentes (both
> > Patrician
> > > and Plebeian) are far too eager to adopt new Citizens. That's why
> > gens Vedia
> > > has never accepted new Citizens as members; there's no way I am
> > going to
> > > adopt someone I don't know personally. But unless you're proposing
> > that we
> > > somehow put curbs on the power of the Paterfamiliae to adopt new
> > sons and
> > > daughters, I don't see what's to be done about it.
> > >
> > > > According to Livy one of the Centuries was for the head
> > > > count. If we applied the same princeples to the Centuries as we do
> > to
> > > > the tribes, we could assign all citizens who fail to vote to the
> > Capti
> > > > Censi as well as to the Urban tribes. This would't have any effect
> > on
> > > > thier points, and they could regain thier place in the classes by
> > > > voting this December. It would open up places in the higher
> > classes
> > > > for those who are active though.
> > >
> > > Now _this_ is an interesting idea! Can you dig up an exact reference
> > for it?
> > > On what basis were Citizens in Roma Antiqua assigned to this "head
> > count"
> > > Century? Was it merely all those who didn't meet the minimum
> > property
> > > requirements for the rest of the Centuries, or was there some other
> > > criterion? Was it considered part of one of the five classes, or was
> > it some
> > > sort of supernumerary century? How do you see this impacting the
> > problem of
> > > already-undersized Centuries; wouldn't it just exaccerbate it?
> > >
> > > Valete,
> > >
> > > Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> > > Consul
> > >
> > > email: germa--------s@-------- > > > AIM: Flavius Vedius
> > > www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
> >
> > Salve, Flavius Vedius,
> >
> > It's a busy day at work, so I''l have to wait to give you a full
> > response. I did want to send a link that discusses the classes and the
> > centuries as described by Livy.
> >
> > http://myron.sjsu.edu/romeweb/discussion/government/early_government.h
> > tm
> >
> > Vale,
> > L. Sicinius Drusus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:10:50 -0500

Salve;

It worked for me; remember, it's wrapping around, so you'll have to type in
the last few letters after it fails to load the first time.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla [mailto:alexious@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 09:13
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: Powers of the Tribunes
>
>
> Ave
>
> That link doesn't work! Do you have another or is it typed correctly?
>
> L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
>
> "L. Sicinius Drusus" wrote:
>
> >
> > Salve, Flavius Vedius,
> >
> > It's a busy day at work, so I''l have to wait to give you a full
> > response. I did want to send a link that discusses the classes and the
> > centuries as described by Livy.
> >
> > http://myron.sjsu.edu/romeweb/discussion/government/early_government.h
> > tm
> >
> > Vale,
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>
>
>

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:14:20 -0600 (CST)

Salvete Quirites,

> As far as I can tell, there has been no discussion whatsoever on any
> of the topics covered, either in public here on the main email list or on
> the CPT list.

I agree with the Senior Consul here that there should be open discussion
of any proposed laws, on the public lists, long before the start of
voting. Gnaeus Moravius has pointed out that he is required to post
the proposals one day before the start of voting, which he will do
today; but there's no reason that they cannot be presented informally
a week or two before.

> > > full texts will be posted to the Comitia Plebis Tributa
> > > list on Friday 19 January 2754 AUC at Roma (Thursday 18 January 2754 AUC
> > > US).

Midnight Roma equates to 11pm Greenwich or 5pm US/Central time, so we'll
expect to see the proposals in full tonight.

> I am all in favor of specifying how the powers of the Tribunes (as listed in
> the Constitution) should be employed. Such is a necessary function of laws
> and plebiscita.

Most of T. Labienus' proposal to the Senate last month was concerned with
defining these powers and how they operate.

> > > II. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis
> > Tributorum,
>
> No problem. The Comitia Plebis Tributa should of course define its own
> internal voting procedures and mechanisms.

Rumour has it this includes a longer commentary period for proposals
before the election, rather than the one day required now.

> > > IV. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia, Pass/Fail
> Without seeing the specifics, it is impossible to tell if this proposal
> would trample the Constitutional rights of magistrates. Would it, for
> example, include a Dictator?

Edicts of a Dictator, or by Consuls operating under the Senatus Consultum
Ultimum, take precedence over everything but the Constitution itself.
Thus, the Dictator could strike down this law in a matter of minutes
if he felt it necessary.

> > > V. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia, Pass/Fail
> > > Reaffirms the Lex Caecilia Didia of 655 AUC (98 c.e.) prohibitng any
> > > disparate provisions made between Nova Roma cives in any leges,

> What, precisely, is meant by "disparate provisions"?

I had read a brief reference to the Lex Caecilia Didia in a book,
just a day or two before this was posted... I think that it was
concerned with "unrelated" items being thrown together in a single
law. We'll know for certain later tonight.

> > > VI. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria, Pass/Fail
> > >
> > > Reaffirms Lev Ovinia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.)
>
> It sounds as if you are trying to redefine the qualifications for Senate
> membership.

I'm confused by this one. I did a web search for "Lex Ovinia" and found
that it granted the Censors power to determine who would be Senators,
when previously this had been done by the Consuls. But this is the
situation we already have... the Censors already have this power here.
So what's the point of reaffirming the Lex Ovinia, if it only guarantees
something that's already in the Constitution?

> Surely this is an issue that all of the People-- Patrician and
> Plebeian alike-- should not only vote on, but discuss beforehand? Perhaps
> the Senate itself should be consulted? I must say this smacks of an attempt
> to "stack" the Senate, and the fact that it is being done in such a
> back-room manner should raise apprehensions from all of our Citizens.

I'm not too worried... the Lex Vedia Senatorium was a dictatorial edict,
thus it cannot be superceded by a Plebiscite. But I agree that such
things should be voted on by *all* citizens.

> I look forward to reading the details of the proposed plebiscita, so a
> substantive and detailed discussion (which has hitherto been non-existant)
> may take place. I only wish the Tribunes had seen fit to do so earlier,
> rather than rushing to call a vote on these "hidden" proposals they have
> concocted in an apparent vaccuum.

Agreed; the full proposals should have been made public.

Valete, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:15:10 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@e...>
wrote:
> Ave
>
> That link doesn't work! Do you have another or is it typed
correctly?
>
> L. Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
SNIP
> >
http://myron.sjsu.edu/romeweb/discussion/government/early_government.h
> > tm
> >
> > Vale,
> > L. Sicinius Drusus

I used copy and paste on the link, but it's too long to fit on one
line, and e-groups software failed to include the last two letters as
part of the link. If you type it in rather than clicking on it, then
it should work.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People and AD
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 06:40:46 -0800

Ave

Actually I think it does. You are, in your example limiting the rights of
citizenship of a citizen to stand for office. That would be changing the
Constitution of Nova Roma, hence it MUST go before the Centuries. Not the Comitia
Plebis. IMHO.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

labienus@-------- wrote:

> Salve L Sergi
>
> > It wouldn't matter if it did pass - it would have no force. Currently
> > there is nothing to stop a pair of clowning Tribuni from putting forth a
> > plebiscitum that would dictate that the sun rise in the West and set in
> > the East. If you want to look truly silly, why don't you go all the way?
>
> Sigh. My example was deliberately extreme and absurd, purely in order to
> illustrate the point. It's a common ploy when making an argument, and I rather
> expect that you have used it in the past yourself.
>
> > It doesn't fall within the purview of the CPT to set qualifications for
> > national offices.
>
> Actually, it does, both historically and in Nova Roma.
>
> Vale
> T Labienus Fortunatus
>

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:40:19 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcus Octavius Germanicus [mailto:haase@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 11:14
>
> I had read a brief reference to the Lex Caecilia Didia in a book,
> just a day or two before this was posted... I think that it was
> concerned with "unrelated" items being thrown together in a single
> law. We'll know for certain later tonight.

If this is indeed what is being referred to, this is already covered by the
Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis Tributorum, last paragraph, which
states "Leges satura, which are laws which deal with more than one topic,
may not be enacted by the comitia plebis tributa. Laws dealing with
different aspects of the same topic shall not fall into this category."

> I'm not too worried... the Lex Vedia Senatorium was a dictatorial edict,
> thus it cannot be superceded by a Plebiscite. But I agree that such
> things should be voted on by *all* citizens.

Actually no. Those laws were indeed instituted by a dictatorial edict, but
with "legal precidence appropriate to their title". That was done on
purpose, exactly so they could be modified by new legislation if needed.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	[novaroma] Roman Glassmakers
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:38:19 -0500 (EST)

Salvete, Nova Roman Citizens;

I beg leave to inform you of a notification and catalog just recieved
having to do with Roman Glassmaking. The letter of introduction states
in part:

"We are glassmakers based near Salisbury in England and specialize in
reproducing a wide range of high quality reproductions of Ancient Roman
Glass Vessels entirely by hand."

Thier catalog (with price list) runs to 24 pages and the range of thier
offered products is quite impressive. I have no first-hand knowledge of
thier service, but I include herein the Masthead information on thier
introductory letter:

--Mark Taylor and David Hill--Roman Glassmakers--Unit 11 • Project
Workshops • Lains Farm • Quarley • Andover • Hampshire • SP11
8PX • UK--

Telephone & Fax: 01264 889688;

E-Mail: romanglassmakers@--------

My intention is to make a copy of this catalog, and send it to Consul
Marcus Cassius Julianus for his review, and possible placement on the NR
Macellum Site, with my strong positive recommendation.

I hope that this information will find some small value on this net.

Valete, Very Respectfully;
Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!


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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:46:21 US/Central

Salvete

I just wanted to comment upon a point that M Octavius brought up.

> I'm not too worried... the Lex Vedia Senatorium was a dictatorial edict,
> thus it cannot be superceded by a Plebiscite.

So, for that matter, are Lex Vedia de Ratione Eligium and the Leges Vediae that
set forth proceudres for the trina comitia. Fortunately, Consul Vedius
issued the following as part of his last edictum as dictator:

"2) All edicta issued by me during my tenure as dictator (both previous and
subsequent to this edictum) shall have legal precidence appropriate to their
title as recorded in the aerarium Saturnii. That is, edicta shall have the
legal authority of edicta issued by a dictator, Senatus consulta shall have the
legalauthority of an ordinarily-passed Senatus consultum, et cetera. A law
enacted by my edictum may still be superceded by a law voted by the comitia,
etc.Appointments are to be regarded as having been made according to whatever
normal legal and/or constitutional process would be involved. All
documents listed in the "provisional documents" section of the aerarium
Saturnii are hereby put into effect as lex, decretum, Senatus consultum,
constitution et cetera, as appropriate. I do reserve the right to make
last-minute changes prior to my official laying down of my office. Merely
because something was enacted by my edictum as dictator shall not necessarily
imply that that thing bears with it the full weight of a dictator's edictum."

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:55:09 US/Central

Salve Luci Corneli

> Actually I think it does.  You are, in your example limiting the rights of
> citizenship of a citizen to stand for office.  That would be changing the
> Constitution of Nova Roma, hence it MUST go before the Centuries.  Not the
> Comitia Plebis.  IMHO.

The constitution does not guarantee the right to stand for office. My absurd
example would not require any change to it, nor would it violate any other
power that holds precedence over plebiscita. That is why I said that there's
nothing stopping a pair of tribuni from putting such a law before the Comitia
Plebis Tributa. As always, the people are the primary defence against such
measures.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:05:51 -0600 (CST)

Salve Tite Labiene,

> "2) All edicta issued by me during my tenure as dictator (both previous and
> subsequent to this edictum) shall have legal precidence appropriate to their
> title as recorded in the aerarium Saturnii.

Right; I had missed this entirely. Thus, you'll be able to completely
replace the lex regarding Comitia Plebis procedures with your new
one.

Vale, O.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Plebis and the People
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:36:49 -0800

Ave.

I respectfully disagree. According to I.B it states. The Following rights of
the citizens shall be guaranteed, but this enumeration shall not be taken to
exclude other rights that citizens may posses. To me, this means that when I.B.3
gives the right to vote to citizens. And other Lexes clarify when citizens meet
certain requirements to stand for office, it is implying that citizens have a
right to stand for political office. Therefore, even your absurd statement, is,
IMHO completely illegal, given that any change to the Constitution must go to the
Comitia Centuriata.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


labienus@-------- wrote:

> Salve Luci Corneli
>
> > Actually I think it does. You are, in your example limiting the rights of
> > citizenship of a citizen to stand for office. That would be changing the
> > Constitution of Nova Roma, hence it MUST go before the Centuries. Not the
> > Comitia Plebis. IMHO.
>
> The constitution does not guarantee the right to stand for office. My absurd
> example would not require any change to it, nor would it violate any other
> power that holds precedence over plebiscita. That is why I said that there's
> nothing stopping a pair of tribuni from putting such a law before the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa. As always, the people are the primary defence against such
> measures.
>
> Vale
> T Labienus Fortunatus

Subject:	[novaroma] Plebiscita and the Constitution
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 13:04:46 -0800

Salvete Sulla et Quirites

Sulla scripsit:
"I have a question. According to Article 1 Section D, it states, "This
Constitution may be altered by law passed by the Comitia Centuriata,
such alternations to this Constitution must be ratified by a vote of
two-thirds of the entire Senate before they shall take affect. "

"Now, according to the very first item. It looks like a Constitutional
change. The Comitia Plebis is not the correct venue for it."

Re:
> I. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates
>
> Defines the honors, responsibilities, and duties of the
Tribunes of the
> Plebeians under IV.A.7 with regard to tibunician powers of intercesso,
> calling of the Comitia Plebis Tributa and Senate, auxilium, assertum,
and
> coercito; authority to issue nuntio, denuntio, rescriptae and
responsae;
> and authority to appoint Plebeian scribae, curatores, and viatores.
>

Respondeo:

None of the plebiscita change any of the provisions of the Constitution.
Each plebiscitum makes reference to the Constitution with regard to the
Comitia Plebis Tributa having authority by it to enact plebiscita, and to
portions of the Constitution they address. Clarifying and defining terms
as the plebiscita seek to do shall improve upon the way the provisions of
the Constitution shall be uniformly applied. But in that none of the
plebiscita can be construed as an amendment to the Constitution.

As to the specific plebiscitum you refer to, and I may add in the case
of the other plebiscita as well, the Comitia Plebis Tributa has every
right under the Constitution to direct how Plebeian officers shall
conduct themselves in their offices, what procedures the CPT shall abide
by, and how Plebeians shall be provided for under the Constitution. All
of the tribunician powers enumerated in the plebiscitum are present under
the Constitution. Not all of them have before been so delineated as they
are here. Where there has been made some expansion on the Constitution
is (1) in increasing the responsibilities of the Tribunes in making
themselves available to all citizens, and not just to Plebeians, (2)
providing for the Tribunes to communicate to the Comitia and
distinguishing between the type of messages they may issue, (3) and
authorizing the Tribunes to appoint Plebeian functionaries for the
activities of the Comitia itself. All of those provisions made in the
plebiscitum are clearly under the jurisdiction of the Comitia by the
provisions of the Constitution under Section III.C.

I am certain that if the Senator would simply go to the Tabularum and
read the Constitution once in a while, as he so often advises others to
do, he will find all the provisions of the Constitution cited by the
plebiscita.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Flamen Cerealis et Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Big Provincia!
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:57:16 -0600

18 Jan 2001

Salve Marcus

Good day to you my friend! My comments below

From: "Marcos Boehme"
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Big Provincia!
> Salve my friend Biggus D.., that is Quintus Sertorius.
> In a certain edictum of Canada Orientalis, Pompeia requests some of the
northern canadian islands. It seems that the map in inexact and your
province will shrink a bit...
>

COPY OF POST IN QUESTION:
"ATLANTICUS CANADIANA REGION
The Canadian Provinces of Newfoundland (including Labrador), New Brunswick,
Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, plus Baffin Island and Resolution
Island."

QS:
Yes I noticed this, but let it slip as the state recognizes the true size of
my Provincia, but..... Pompeia are you tiring to cut out a large chuck of my
Provincia?!? heh heh

> But... has anyone look at the map of the website for the provincias of
South America? Have you noticed how Brasilia is, in fact bigger than
everyone else combined, and not only a cartographic illusion as Canada
Occidentalis? Please, dont tell me about Sarmatia. :)

QS:
Maybe our two Provincia can start a Inter-Hemispherical Pact!!!!

Vale

Quintus Sertorius
Propraetor
Canada Occidentalis
quintus-sertorius@--------

Join the egroup for Canada Occidentalis
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_CanOcc

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] re: Powers of the Tribunes
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 12:19:01 US/Central

T Labienus L Sicinio et Fl Vedio et Quiritibus SPD

Thank you, Luci Sicini, for bringing this point up in this way. I had been
contemplating a similar attempt to delve into the question myself. My
conclusions are not entirely the same as yours, but the conversation is a
necessary one.

> Bear in mind, the powers of the Tribunes are already weakened in our
> modern reconstruction  because the group which the Tribunes were
> historically developed to counterbalance-- the Patricians-- is nearly
> emasculated (as our good Tribune reminded us yesterday). The question
> before us now is, are the Tribunes weakened _enough_ to make up for the
> complete lack of counterbalancing power of the Patricians?

The answer to that question, which is not the one I think we really should be
asking ourselves, is absolutely not. The Comitia Populi Tributa can enact any
law the other comitia can, with the exception of constitutional amendments. If
we want to emasculate (to use the consul's term) the tribuni as much as the
patricians have been emasculated, then the plebeian assemblies must not have
that power.

However, the question we should be asking ourselves at this stage is, "What
ought the role of the tribuni plebis to be in Nova Roma?" My biggest problem
with Nova Roma's constitution is that it fails to define the *role* of the
various magistrates. It gives them powers, but says nothing about what they
actually should be doing. The old constitution is no help, as it says that the
tribuni are there "to prevent the Plebians [sic] from being overwhelmed by the
power of the patrician class," which is obviously not what they need to be
doing.

Consul Vedius, apparently, would prefer the tribuni to be merely the protectors
of the constitution. And yet, the constitution allows them to call the Senate
to order (though currently they aren't allowed to actually *do* anything with
the Senate as they don't have imperium) and summon the Comitia Plebis Tributa
to vote upon plebeian magistrates, plebiscita, and legal cases. Obviously,
they are there to do more than just veto unconstitutional acts of government
(something which they are hamstrung in doing anyway, due to the need for a
collegial veto).

> > They would
> > be limited to going hat in hand begging for the Comitia Populi to be
> > called on, rather than summoning the the Comitia Plebis.
<amputatio>
>
> I completely agree; let us establish the precedents now. Let the
> precident be that _all_ the people are allowed to discuss, debate, and
> finally vote on issues which pertain to them. Let the precedent be that
> only in the face of the most recalcitrant and obstructionist Consul that the
> Comitia Plebis Tributa needs to be called to pass necessary and vital
> legislation.

So, the CPT is to be some kind of fallback? In what case will the Comitia
Plebis Tributa ever need to be called for this? It would take two such
consules, or a consul working in collusion with at least one tribunus plebis,
for your scenario to occur. If there were only one such consul, he or she
would be required by the constitution to hold an election for another one. If
he or she refused to do so, the CPT couldn't remove him or her--only an
election in the Comitia Centuriata could do that. The Senate would have to
appoint a second consul to call those comitia to order.

> But let us _not_ establish the precident that a fraction of the
> population steamrolls over the rest, merely because the Tribunes are wanting
> for something to do. That would be a most unfortunate precident to set.

Yes it would.

> Remember, in a perfect world, the Tribunes would be idle 99% of the time;
> they should (indeed, must) act when injustices are being perpetrated, and
> rights abused. If the other magistrates are doing their jobs, the
> Tribunes should let them do so.

So, to sum up the consul's opinion, he would prefer the tribuni to exist purely
as a restraint upon the other magistrates, with no other duties aside from
reporting on the Senate's activities. (Please do correct me on that if you
feel otherwise, Consul Vedius)

There are two extremes we could opt for, with a continuum of possibilities in
between.

First, we could really attempt to establish the ancient system, complete with
the Conflict of the Orders that was so central to it. In this case, the
tribunate needs to be greatly strengthened. This is obviously unacceptable to
most of us.

Second, we could opt for an entirely egalitarian society. In this case, we
would set the tribunate up as a simple check upon the other magistrates,
removing their right to convene *any* of the trina comitia except under certain
extreme circumstances, and better defining when and how they may use
intercessio. In this case, we ought also to remove the century point advantage
from the patricians, allow them to be tribuni (there is a historical precedent
for a patrician tribunus plebis in C Iulius Caesar), and allow them to vote in
all of the trina comitia. Indeed, we might go so far as making the Comitia
Plebis Tributa simply serve some ceremonial purpose as the Comitia Curiata does
now. This option is likewise going too far.

At the heart of both of those options, and all of the options between, is the
Conflict of the Orders. How shall we define the difference between patricians
and plebeians? Currently, we've reversed the social order without doing much
about the actual structure of the government.

One thing to note in all of this, BTW, is that the tribunate is the only
magistracy with the ability to put laws before the people that is voted upon by
the tribes. The consules and praetores are voted upon by the centuries, in
which the older cives, the ones with more invested in the status quo, have the
advantage. This is an interesting dynamic that also needs to be factored into
any solution we might attempt.

It's the debate over these issues which interests me most, and I will be
attempting to spark discussion in order to arrive at collective answers to
these and other questions over the coming year.

Valete

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Plebiscita and the Constitution
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 08:52:00 -0800

Ave

Thank you for the clarification. So just to state to all the People of Nova Roma,
your proposed "clarification" will not alter the powers of the Tribune of the Plebs
as stated in the Constitution. Specifically, my concern IV.7.a. or for that matter
any other power and authority derived from the Constitution? Given that we don't
have a full text of what you intend to try to promulgate. I just would like that
clarification.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor of Nova Roma

Gian G Reali wrote:

> Salvete Sulla et Quirites
>
> Sulla scripsit:
> "I have a question. According to Article 1 Section D, it states, "This
> Constitution may be altered by law passed by the Comitia Centuriata,
> such alternations to this Constitution must be ratified by a vote of
> two-thirds of the entire Senate before they shall take affect. "
>
> "Now, according to the very first item. It looks like a Constitutional
> change. The Comitia Plebis is not the correct venue for it."
>
> Re:
> > I. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates
> >
> > Defines the honors, responsibilities, and duties of the
> Tribunes of the
> > Plebeians under IV.A.7 with regard to tibunician powers of intercesso,
> > calling of the Comitia Plebis Tributa and Senate, auxilium, assertum,
> and
> > coercito; authority to issue nuntio, denuntio, rescriptae and
> responsae;
> > and authority to appoint Plebeian scribae, curatores, and viatores.
> >
>
> Respondeo:
>
> None of the plebiscita change any of the provisions of the Constitution.
> Each plebiscitum makes reference to the Constitution with regard to the
> Comitia Plebis Tributa having authority by it to enact plebiscita, and to
> portions of the Constitution they address. Clarifying and defining terms
> as the plebiscita seek to do shall improve upon the way the provisions of
> the Constitution shall be uniformly applied. But in that none of the
> plebiscita can be construed as an amendment to the Constitution.
>
> As to the specific plebiscitum you refer to, and I may add in the case
> of the other plebiscita as well, the Comitia Plebis Tributa has every
> right under the Constitution to direct how Plebeian officers shall
> conduct themselves in their offices, what procedures the CPT shall abide
> by, and how Plebeians shall be provided for under the Constitution. All
> of the tribunician powers enumerated in the plebiscitum are present under
> the Constitution. Not all of them have before been so delineated as they
> are here. Where there has been made some expansion on the Constitution
> is (1) in increasing the responsibilities of the Tribunes in making
> themselves available to all citizens, and not just to Plebeians, (2)
> providing for the Tribunes to communicate to the Comitia and
> distinguishing between the type of messages they may issue, (3) and
> authorizing the Tribunes to appoint Plebeian functionaries for the
> activities of the Comitia itself. All of those provisions made in the
> plebiscitum are clearly under the jurisdiction of the Comitia by the
> provisions of the Constitution under Section III.C.
>
> I am certain that if the Senator would simply go to the Tabularum and
> read the Constitution once in a while, as he so often advises others to
> do, he will find all the provisions of the Constitution cited by the
> plebiscita.
>
> Valete
>
> Cn. Moravius Piscinus
> Flamen Cerealis et Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Hello
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:20:29 -0500

allan001@-------- wrote:

> A soothsayer you say? do tell. anything that you would like to share of teh
> future?

No thunderstorms lately, so no thunder augury possible; most birds have gone south
for the winter...maybe that omen speaks to the allure of warm beaches and exotic
beverages... I do predict at least a month studded with significant
snowfall-producing storms in my area (central CT). I also predict that
California's power problems will escalate and that there will be serious shortages
in several regions of this land within the year. NovaRoma should double its
population within the year, and cives in various regions will begin to meet (and
have informal to semi-formal Roman events) in person. Within 5 years, I see a USA
national NovaRoma gather and also gathers for Europe and Australia.

Techniques used: flame and crystal scrying; "listening" to the land, and omen
observations. Individual fortunes may also be told by examining livers and/or
intestines, but this technique is not suitable for this type of general
prediction. OK for prediction of a given landowner/farmer's prosperity, though.
Salt casting (into flame) is best done for a group of querants, as it is quite
showy and provides good entertainment. One can get interesting information from
that technique. As well as a lot of ooooo's and aaaahhhs.

S. Ambrosia Fulvia

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Hello
From:	allan001@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:43:46 -0200

"J. T. Sibley" wrote:

> allan001@-------- wrote:
>
> > A soothsayer you say? do tell. anything that you would like to share of teh
> > future?
>
> No thunderstorms lately, so no thunder augury possible; most birds have gone south
> for the winter...maybe that omen speaks to the allure of warm beaches and exotic
> beverages... I do predict at least a month studded with significant
> snowfall-producing storms in my area (central CT). I also predict that
> California's power problems will escalate and that there will be serious shortages
> in several regions of this land within the year. NovaRoma should double its
> population within the year, and cives in various regions will begin to meet (and
> have informal to semi-formal Roman events) in person. Within 5 years, I see a USA
> national NovaRoma gather and also gathers for Europe and Australia.
>
> Techniques used: flame and crystal scrying; "listening" to the land, and omen
> observations. Individual fortunes may also be told by examining livers and/or
> intestines, but this technique is not suitable for this type of general
> prediction. OK for prediction of a given landowner/farmer's prosperity, though.
> Salt casting (into flame) is best done for a group of querants, as it is quite
> showy and provides good entertainment. One can get interesting information from
> that technique. As well as a lot of ooooo's and aaaahhhs.
>
> S. Ambrosia Fulvia

thank you. How would i go aobut obtaining a personal reading?


--
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defence.

Subject:	[novaroma] Three Comitia: Relative Powers
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:59:42 -0800

Salvete Senatori et Quirites

I have taken note of many of the comments made today. I should like to
offer my humble opinion about one issue being made in many of today's
post.

There are three comitia empowered by the Constitution to enact
legislation for Nova Roma: the Comitia Centuriata, Comitia Populi
Tributa, and the Comitia Plebis Tributa. All three comitia form a single
branch of our government, where it is not exactly clear how the three
comitia relate to one another. The constitution makes little provision
as to their relative powers. At Section I.D only the Comitia Centuriata,
among the three comitia, is authorized to legislate amendments to the
Constitution. At Section II.B.5 only the Comitia Populi Tributa is
mentioned as having jurisdiction as a court of appeal under the right of
provocatio held by every citizen. But as to the relative authority each
comitia has towards one another, the only provision made is at I.B,
"Should a law passed by one comitia contradict one passed by another or
the same comitia without explicitly superceding that law, the most recent
law shall take precedence."

Carried ad absurdum this would mean that two, or all three committee
might be tossing leges back and forth at one another, with each taking
precedent over the other as fast as each comitia could pump them out.
Sounds like a real rogator nightmare.

My opinion is that the Comitia Plebis Tributa acts as a lower house of
the our legislative branch, comparable but nowhere similar to the House
of Representatives in the US Congress, or the House of Commons in the UK
Parliament. Plebiscita of the Comitia Plebis Tributa cannot in
themselves conflict with the Constitution. The CPT has jurisdiction over
its own internal procedures. It also has jurisdiction over the lesser
authorities of Nova Roma, by Section I.B. The CPT may not change the
Constitution, but it may enact laws in how constitutional provisions may
be applied.

The Comitia Populi Tributa has the same powers to legislate, and the
same limitation placed on the form its legislation may take, as the
Constitution sets on the CPT. Yet I consider the CPopT to be the higher
house of our legislative branch. The reason why I regard it the upper
house is the obvious reason that it is composed of the entire citizenry.
By the Constitution, when the CPT passes a plebiscitum it has the force
of law. The CPopT could then pass its own lex overturning the
plebiscitum. If it did not pass any lex in conflict with the
plebiscitum, then the plebiscitum would be law. Were the CPopT to pass a
lex contravening a plebiscitum, then its lex would take precedent as the
most recent. The CPT under the Constitution, as it is now written, could
try to pass another plebiscitum, and as it would be the more recent, it
would hold precedence. Thus the Rogator's Nightmare. I do not believe
that would actually occur for various reasons.

When both houses of the US Congress pass conflicting bills governing the
same matter, what is done is form a joint committee to work out details
of a compromise, and both houses then pass the same bill. The reason
this is done in this manner is not on account of any law or
constitutional provision. It is a matter of tradition on how these two
houses in that particular Congress has come to resolve such situations.
I trust that Nova Roma will come to form its own traditions. When there
is a major conflict between two comitia, and it turns to becoming a
constitutional issue, then I would think that the Comitia Centuriata
would decide the matter. Were there really some problem in which it
became necessary to stipulate into law what are the relative powers of
the comitia, then naturally that would involve amending the Constitution
and therefore be addressed by the Comitia Centuriata. Short of that, the
interaction of the three comitia simply develops a tradition for how our
own legislative process will work.

Personally I am quite excited by the prospect of further developing a
dynamic government for Nova Roma. We are building our institutions. We
our building our traditions. We are examining ourselves and how we all
come together to form a single entity. Those are the signs of a growing
and maturing body politic. I take delight in the diversity of opinion
and the vitality of our interactions during this whole process. It only
speaks to how much our little community is developing into a true nature;
how our little res publica is becoming a true inheritor of its Roman
heritage.

Quod bonum, felix, faustumque sit. Nova Roma libera semper vivat.
May it be good, fortunate, and prosperous. May a free Nova Roma always
live.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Flamen Cerealis et Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	[novaroma] EDICTUM - ISSUED BY CURULE AEDILE
From:	Odysseus49@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:07:15 -0000

Salvete,

EDICTUM

I) This edict empowers the people of Provincia Gallia to obtain the
subdomain on the Nova Roma Website, http://gallia.novaroma.org .

IIa)This edict further empowers the people of Gallia's appointed
magistrates to have the following official e-mail addresses:

Propraetor@--------
Procurator@--------
Legatus.Australis@--------
Legatus.Borealis@--------
Retiarus@--------

b) These official e-mail addresses shall be included on the website
with the other magistrates' e-mail addresses.

****************************************************************

Bene vale,
Titus Sertorius Albinus.

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] FW: [ComitiaPlebisTributa] Description of Plebiscita before the CPT
From:	Christer Edling <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:06:04 +0100

>Salvete
>
>I just wanted to comment upon a point that M Octavius brought up.
>
>> I'm not too worried... the Lex Vedia Senatorium was a dictatorial edict,
>> thus it cannot be superceded by a Plebiscite.
>
>So, for that matter, are Lex Vedia de Ratione Eligium and the Leges Vediae
>that
>set forth proceudres for the trina comitia. Fortunately, Consul Vedius
>issued the following as part of his last edictum as dictator:
>
>"2) All edicta issued by me during my tenure as dictator (both previous and
>subsequent to this edictum) shall have legal precidence appropriate to their
>title as recorded in the aerarium Saturnii. That is, edicta shall have the
>legal authority of edicta issued by a dictator, Senatus consulta shall
>have the
>legalauthority of an ordinarily-passed Senatus consultum, et cetera. A law
>enacted by my edictum may still be superceded by a law voted by the comitia,
>etc.Appointments are to be regarded as having been made according to whatever
>normal legal and/or constitutional process would be involved. All
>documents listed in the "provisional documents" section of the aerarium
>Saturnii are hereby put into effect as lex, decretum, Senatus consultum,
>constitution et cetera, as appropriate. I do reserve the right to make
>last-minute changes prior to my official laying down of my office. Merely
>because something was enacted by my edictum as dictator shall not necessarily
>imply that that thing bears with it the full weight of a dictator's edictum."
>
>Valete
>T Labienus Fortunatus

Salve!

I am getting a bad feeling about this!

Out with it T Labienus Fortunatus and G. Moravius Piscinus What are You up to?

I chose to be "born" a patrician fully aware that it had it's advantages
and disadvantages, but I don't think that any patrician, when he chose to
enter Nova Roma, thought that a couple of Tribunes would show total
arrogance and propose to legislate by putting the patricians aside.

In Roma Antiqua this may have been motivated, but not here in Nova Roma
where there is no real difference between the Orders. I joined Nova Roma
freely! Do You now want to force me out of this attempt to build a modern
Rome? In old Rome I could have bought a Tribune of my own or bought someone
to beat You up, but not here in Nova Roma. And You know what, I don't want
to! But on the other side I don't want to be made aplaything for your
personal amusement!

I demand to know what You purpose is and the details of your proposals!
There is a chance that You have a good purpose with your proposed leges!
Then out with it loud and clear! We will listen! At least You have achieved
that! ;-)


Vale

Christer Edling
alias
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor; Nova Roma
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
SHAMALI SALUKIS
************************************************
CAMELOT ROLEPLAYING WORKSHOP
Robert Andersson & Christer Edling
************************************************
IF GAMES - If reality was different!
Markus Sundbom & Christer Edling
************************************************
MAIN E-MAIL ADDRESS: tjalens.h@--------
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Hello
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:09:00 -0500

allan001@-------- wrote:

> thank you. How would i go aobut obtaining a personal reading?

Where do you live? It's easier if I have the victim....uhhh, Client....close at hand.
Thus, an omen close to (or observed by) you could be interpreted on the spot if I also
observed same. But if there is something unusual that you observe, or an unusual dream
[note that I am focusing on Roman period divination techniques!], and you wish to email
it to me in private, off-list sending, I will do what I can to interpret it/them. When
the customer and soothsayer are in the same place, it's much easier to bring a battery
of other techniques into play. Vitreomancy, various patterning techniques, casting
(including geomancy), dowsing (pendula go wayyyy back!), various forms of physiognomy
such as molography (moles), palmistry, etc....those are best done at close range. hard
to e-read a palm.....Plus...the soothsayer can also collect his/her fee at close range,
hehehe... (on NovaRoma, my soothsaying is a service, just as our esteemed, hardworking,
and noble officers and priests serve without remuneration)

S. Ambrosia Fulvia

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Return to action
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:58:37 EST

Salve Sura,

Welcome back! And I am glad that your bill of health is clean.


Vale,
Aeternia

Subject:	[novaroma] Draft Leges for Review
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:05:00 -0500

Salvete, Omnes!

We are currently planning to convene the Comitia Populi Tributa on January
27th, with the vote going through the 4th of February. (It's necessary to
start the election before the 30th, because we will also be voting on two
Quaestores and the Curator Differum, and there's a 30-day time limit on
vacancies.) We are still working out the final details with the Rogatores
and Curator Araneum, so the date might change slightly. I'll let everyone
know when it's been finalized.

>From the various discussions that we've had over the last few weeks (along
with one "housekeeping" change I noticed while doing some research in the
Tabularium), we have come up with the following draft proposals for
legislation. I present them here for informal discussion; I think it's
better to be able to see the actual text of a proposed law, because if there
are any technical flaws, it's better to catch them _before_ the vote starts.
The "commentatio" beneath each is just my own explanation; it won't be part
of the actual law.

Also, I know my latin titles are probably awful. Any suggestions are
appreciated. :-)

-----

Lex Vedia de Rogatorae

Paragraph IV. of the Lex Vedia Vigintisexviri is hereby amended to read as
follows:

Rogatores. Four rogatores (voting officials) shall be responsible for the
administration of elections and the recording of votes among the curia. Each
rogatorus shall have the authority to appoint his own scribae, should he
deem it necessary. Should one or more positions be vacant, and suitable and
willing candidates are available, an election shall be held within thirty
days in the comitia populi tributa; otherwise the Senate shall have the
authority to appoint rogatores pro tem until such an election can be held.
The lack of a full compliment of, or the active participation of, four
rogatores shall not in and of itself be sufficient to invalidate or postpone
a particular election, and the rogatores may divide their duties amongst
themselves as they see fit and is practical. Inasmuch as they, by
definition, are privy to the details of the election process, the rogatores
may not run for any office while they serve in office (including running for
rogatorus again).

(COMMENTATIO: The number of rogatores is increased from two to four, not all
need to be present to conduct an election, and a minor grammatical error is
corrected.)

-----

Lex Vedia de Magistratum Aetate

Paragraph VI. of the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate is hereby amended to
read as follows:

An exemption to this law may be granted to a person by the approval of both
censors and a senatus consultum approved by a two thirds majority vote. Such
an exemption must be sought prior to the official start of the election in
question, and must be granted in order to participate as a formal candidate
in the election process. A failure to act on the question of an exemption
shall not constitute a tacit approval of the exemption.

(COMMENTATIO: Last two sentences are new, and specify that the exemption
must be granted before voting starts, and must be obtained in order to stand
as a candidate.)

-----

Lex Vedia de Ratione Automatia

Paragraph III.C. of the Lex Vedia de Ratione Eligium is hereby amended to
read as follows:

Within 48 hours of the deadline for voting, the rogatores shall tally the
votes and shall deliver the results to the magistrate who called the comitia
to order and his collegial magistrate. Votes may be tallied by automated
means should the rogatores determine such is preferable to, and at least as
accurate as, a manual count. Only the aggregate votes of the tribes and/or
centuries (as appropriate) shall be delivered; the votes of individual
citizens shall be secret. The magistrates shall announce the results of the
vote within 24 hours of receipt, in at least the same fora as the initial
announcement was made.

(COMMENTATIO: Second sentence is new, allows for computerized counting of
votes at the rogatores' discretion.)

-----

Lex Vedia de Civium Rudimentum per Suffragio

I. No applications for Citizenship are to be processed or approved while one
or more of the Comitiae is in the process of undertaking a vote and/or
election. Such applications may be accepted and held until the end of the
election and/or vote in question, whereupon they are to be processed with
all due dilligence and speed, subject to all other laws which may otherwise
apply to the process.

II. During the time when applications for Citizenship are not processed as
described under this law, the Curator Araneum shall post an announcement
where individuals completing the application for Citizenship may reasonably
be expected to see it, explaining the situation and giving a reasonable
estimate of when the prospective Citizens may expect to have his or her
application processed.

(COMMENTATIO: All new. Basically, new applications during elections are on
hold, and people applying during such times are told so, and given an idea
when their application will be processed.)

-----

Lex Vedia de Ratione Edictium

The last sentence of paragraph I. of the Lex Vedia de Ratione Edictium is
hereby amended to read as follows:

Such edicta shall be posted in the Tabularium by the curator araneum as soon
as practical.

(COMMENTATIO: The original law still refers to the Aerarium Saturni, the
name of which was changed to the Tabularium. This just catches this law up
with the name change.)

-----

Comments, questions, suggestions, etc. are welcome.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

email: germanicus@--------
AIM: Flavius Vedius
www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Greetings!
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:13:02 EST

Salve Lentulus,


As a friend to your Pater and many of your gentiles, I welcome you to Nova
Roma. May your stay be as energetic and happy as you seem to be. If you need
any help at all free feel to e-mail me.


Bene Vale,
Aeternia

Subject:	[novaroma] Sodalitas Militarium Newsletter
From:	"Pompeia Cornelia" <scriba_forum@-------->
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2001 14:48:55 -0000

Salvete Omnes:

I am most impressed with the graphics and layout of our premiere edition of
the Militarium Newsletter.

I would like to publicly commend Livia Cornelia Aurelia and Caius Flavius
Diocletianus for their hard work.

Bene vale,
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Greetings!
From:	tekwkp@--------
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:55:41 EST

Salve Aeternia,

Thank you for the warm greetings. Alack and alas, it has been many years
since I heard Latin spoken, much less knew and used the responses. I am
referring to the Tridentine Mass, from a religion I once believed in. Now, I
need some direction in translation of many of the Latin words used in the
messages. One thing I am grateful for, I just retired from a career with the
Federal government, and I have the time to read the messages received from
NovaRoma. Alas, my Pater is not on line, or rather aol.com, is not
cooperating with me. So, I will take you up on your kind offer.I do have
several questions, meaningful to me, but hardly worthy of posting.

Vale,

Lentulus

Subject:	[novaroma] P. de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:00:47 -0800

EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS

Salvete Quirites

The following Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia is
hereby placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa for consideration on a
pass/fail basis.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis



*******************************************************

Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecila Didia

In accordance with Section II, Parts A, B and C of the Constitution of
Nova Roma, under the authority of Sections I.B and III.C.1, the following
plebiscitum is made as a reaffirmation of the Lex Caecilia Didia, 655
AUC.

1) No measures shall be passed, no leges placed before a comitia, no
plebescita placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa, nor edicta issued by
any magistrate or any provincial praetor or any subordinate acting in
their name, which includes disparate measures and/or disparate provisions
of any nature among the citizens of Nova Roma in the exercise of their
rights, as outlined in Section II.B and elsewhere.

2) All leges and plebescita previously enacted, all edicta previously
issued, which have provided disparate measures among the citizenry of
Nova Roma are hereby nullified in those provisions.

3) All citizens of Nova Roma who are eligible to vote, without
exception, shall have the same rights and privileges before the law and
without prejudice to any immunity conferred by any office they may hold
in Nova Roma. Particular exception is made to this plebiscitum for the
provisions of those governing decreta of the Collegium Pontificum, the
Collegium Augurum, and as to the incorporating regula of certain
sodalitas. Any sodalitas which seeks recognition by the Nova Roma Senate
as an official sodalitas must conform to all provisions of Nova Roman
laws and may not include any disparate measures or provisions in its
regula. Sodalitates which seek association with Nova Roma through the
Collegium Pontificum must conform to the provisions set by the Collegium
Pontificum. Although other sodalitates may be formed by Nova Roma
citizens, no sodalitates shall gain official recognition except from the
Senate or from the Collegium Pontificum, and under the respective
provisions. Any provisions for honores, official titles, rights,
privileges or powers attained by virtue of running for election, and/or
accepting or assuming public offices or religious offices, shall not be
regarded as a disparate measure or provision.

4) No additional obligations shall be placed on any order, class, or
otherwise distinguished group of citizens, above those obligations placed
on all other citizens, save by those obligations incurred by virtue of
any office or position in Nova Roma that they willing accept.

Subject:	[novaroma] P. de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:00:37 -0800

EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS

Salvete Quirites

The following Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia
is hereby placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa for consideration on a
pass/fail basis.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis


******************************


Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia

In accordance with Section II, Parts A.3, B, C and D of the Constitution
of Nova Roma, under the authority of Sections I.B and III.C.1, the
following plebiscitum is made as a reaffirmation of the Lex Canuleia, 308
AUC.

1) No provisions shall be included in any leges, plebiscita, edicta,
decreta, rescripta, or responsa to be issued by any magistrate or
official of Nova Roma, or put before a comitia for a vote, which shall be
held to prohibit conuptia among Plebeians, among Patricians, or between
Patricians and Plebeians; nor shall provisions likewise prohibit,
nullify, or disallow a confarreatio between a patrician and a plebeian.

2) No pater or mater familias shall have the authority to prohibit
conuptia of gens members, nor may they coerce by any means any member of
their respective gentes into conuptia.

3.a) The individuals who enter into conuptia with one another are
solely authorized for detailing the arrangements of their relationship.
They may enter into any and all gentes that will accept them, or remain
in their respective gentes, or they may form their own gens without
interference or inhibiting effect allowed to be made by any magistrate.
A new gens thus created out of a conuptia shall be entered by the Censors
into the Album Gentes, subject only to Sectiom II.D.2.
3.b) Each individual citizen may belong to only one gens. Individuals
joined in a conuptia are not required to change their gens affiliation,
and thus members to a conuptia agreement may belong to different gentes.


4) Children born to parents of differing orders may be placed in the
gens of either parent, provided the pater or mater familias of the
designated gens approves. Otherwise the children shall be considered to
belong to the gens and the order of the natural mother.

Subject:	[novaroma] P. de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:00:00 -0800

EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS

Salvete Quirites

The following Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia is hereby
placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa for consideration on a pass/fail
basis.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis


******************************

Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfimatio Lex Icilia

In accordance with Sections I, III, and IV of the Constitution of Nova
Roma, under the authority of Sections I.B and III.C.1, the following
plebiscitum is enacted as a reaffirmation of the Lex Icilia, 282 AUC, to
ensure Sections II.B.3, and III.B.C. and D., with provision made in
accord with Section IV.A.7a

1) No magistrate, major or minor, ordinarii or extraordinarii, shall
interrupt, interfer, or otherwise inhibit the assembly and/or voting
procedures of the Comitia Plebis Tributa either directly or through the
use of agentes provocatores. Nor shall any magistrate, major or minor,
ordinarii or extraordinarii, attempt to recruit agentes provocatores or
encourage other magistrates, major or minor, ordinarii or extraordinarii,
to act in a manner intended to disrupt or otherwise interfer with the
legal assembly and/or voting procedures of the Comitia Tributa Plebis.

2) Jurisdiction for judgement under this plebiscitum shall be held in
the Comitia Plebis Tributa whose assembly and/or procedures were thus
violated.

3) Provision is made for the Tribuni Plebis to exercise their tribunicia
potestates under the authority of Section IV.A.7, in relation to the
assembly and procedures of the comitia:
a.) A call to assemble must be made no less than 72 hours in advance of
its assembly, in which time any of the Tribuni Plebis may issue an
intercessio. A legal assembly of any comitia shall be construed to mean
that a call to assemble was made by the appropriate magistrate with a
proper interval of time, and that no Tribunus Plebis has issued an
intercessio against the magistrate's action.
b.) No Tribunus Plebis individually, nor the Tribuni Plebis
collegiately, may halt any comitia once it has assembled for the purpose
of considering proposed leges or plebiscita, nor when a comitia has
assembled for an election.
c.) Any leges or plebiscita passed in any comitia is still subject to
the intercessio of the Tribuni Plebis under the authority of Section
IV.A.7a.
d.) A comitia assembled for the purpose of holding trial, as provided
in Section III. B.3, C.3, and D.3, shall be subject to a Tribunus Plebis
authority to remove its proceedings to a higher judicial authority by the
tribunician power of auxilium. Such a removal to another judicial
authority shall not be construed as an interruption, interference, or
inhibition of the assembled comitia, but as a continuance of its
proceedings.

Subject:	[novaroma] P. de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:00:22 -0800

EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS

Salvete Quirites

The following Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia is hereby
placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa for consideration on a pass/fail
basis.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis

******************************


Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia

In accordance with Sections I. B, II.B.3, III.C, and Section IV.A.7.d
of the Constitution of Nova Roma, under the authority of Sections I.B and
III.C.1, the following plebiscitum is made as a reaffirmation of the Lex
Caecilia Publilia of 414 AUC.

The Comitia Plebis Tributa may be called to assemble (agere cum plebe)
and may conduct its proceedures without requirement of patrum auctoris or
auspicia being first obtained. Any plebiscita passed by the Comitia
Plebis Tributa may not be nullified for lack of an auspicia or patrum
auctoris.

Subject:	[novaroma] CALL FOR ASSEMBLY OF CPT TO VOTE
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:59:02 -0800

TRIBUNI PLEBIS CONVOCANT AGERE CUM PLEBE

Tribuni Plebis Labienus Fortunatus et Moravius Piscinus Quiritibus SPD:

The Comitia Plebis Tributa is hereby called to assemble for the purpose
of electing an Aedilis Plebis and for the purpose of voting on the
passage of plebiscita brought before the comitia by the Tribuni Plebis.

(1) All citizens eligible to vote in the Comitia Plebis Tributa shall
select a new Aedilis Plebis from candidates:

L. Aetius Dalmaticus
M. Apollonius Formosanus

The cista shall be opened, and its location posted on the Nova Roma main
list and linked from the Nova Roma website main page, and voting for
Aedilis Plebis shall commence beginning on 20 January 2754 AUC, 12:00 AM
in Rome / 19 Janunary 2754 AUC US EDST, and contiue until 31 January 2754
AUC, 12:00 AM in Rome / 6:00 PM 30 January US EDST.


(2) The following plebiscita are placed before the Comitia Plebis
Tributa on this
19 January 2754 AUC, 12:00 AM Rome / 18 January 2754 AUC, 6:00 PM US
EDST, to be voted on beginning 20 January 2754 AUC, 12:00 AM in Rome / 19
Janunary 2754 AUC US EDST, until 31 January 2754 AUC, 12:00 AM in Rome /
6:00 PM 30 January US EDST. The cista shall be opened, its location
posted to the Nova Roma main list and linked from the Nova Roma main web
page, along with cista for the election of the Aedilis Plebis.

Below are descriptions of the plebiscita; the full text of each
plebiscitum has been posted separately to the Nova Roma main list and to
the Comitia Plebis Tributa list on Friday 19 January 2754 AUC at Roma /
Thursday 18 January 2754 AUC New York.


> I. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates
>
> Defines the honors, responsibilities, and duties of the
> Tribunes of the Plebeians under IV.A.7 with regard to tibunician
> powers of intercesso, calling of the Comitia Plebis Tributa and
> Senate, auxilium, assertum, and coercito; authority to issue nuntio,
> denuntio, rescriptae and responsae; and authority to appoint
> Plebeian scribae, curatores, and viatores.
>
>
> II. Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis
> Tributorum, Pass/Fail
>
> Replaces the Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitia Plebis Tributa and
> establishes new procedures for the comitia to follow in regard to
> voting on candidates for Plebeian offices and plebiscita. Reference
> to III.C.1 and 2.
>
>
> III. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia, Pass/Fail
>
> Reaffirmation of the Lex Publilia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) that
> a call for assembly of the Comitia Plebis Tributa may be made
> without prior patrum auctoris or auspicia. Reference to III.C and
> IV.A.7.
>
>
> IV. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia, Pass/Fail
>
> Reaffirms the Lex Icilia of 259 AUC (471 c.e.) prohibiting
> any magistrate from interferring or disrupting the calling forth or
> procedures taken within the Comitia Plebis Tributa. Reference
> toII.B.3, and III.C.1 and 2. .
>
>
> V. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia, Pass/Fail
>
> Reaffirms the Lex Caecilia Didia of 655 AUC (98 c.e.)
> prohibitng any disparate provisions made between Nova Roma cives in
> any leges, plebiscita, edicta, making exceptions for decreta of the
> Collegium Pontificum and the Collegium Augurum, and the
> incorporating regula of sodalitates. With reference to Section
> II.A.3; and II.B
>
>
> VI. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria,
> Pass/Fail
>
> Reaffirms Lev Ovinia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) clarifying and
> defining terms used for the procedures in the provisions of the Lex
> Vedia Senatoria with regard to IV.A.1d, IV.A.2.c and V.A on the
> elevation of "all the best men and women of all ranks and orders" to
> the Senate as "the repository of experience and wisdom."
>
>
> VII. Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia,
> Pass/Fail
>
> Reaffirms the Lex Canuleia of 308 AUC (445 c.e.)
> establishing rights of all cives, regardless of their orders, to
> engage in conuptia and confarreatio. Ensuring civil rights of
> Section II.B. 1 and 6.

Subject:	[novaroma] P. de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:59:30 -0800

EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS

Salvete Quirites

The following Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria
is hereby placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa for consideration on a
pass/fail basis.

Valete
Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis


*****************************************


Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria:

In accordance with Section V of the Constitution of Nova Roma, under
the authority of Sections I.B and III.C.1, the following plebiscitum
further clarifies and defines the procedures to be followed by the
censors in performing their duties under Section IV.A.1.d, and by the
Senate in the inclusion of new members under Section V, with regard to
the provisions made under the Lex Vedia Senatoria. As such, this
plebiscitum is a reaffirmation of the Lex Ovinia, 414 AUC.

1) The Censors shall be bound by their oaths of office to enroll into
the Senate all the best men and women of all ranks and orders.

2) The Censors shall without exception enroll into the Senate any
citizen properly elected to assume the offices of consul, censor, or
praetor, and shall place their names into the Album Senatorum.
Magistrates shall be regarded as enrolled in the Senate upon taking the
oath of office, and shall not be required to await on the Censors to
enter their names in the Album Senatorum in order to be considered
enrolled in the Senate. Magistrates appointed suffectus shall be entered
into the Senate as full members with full rights and privileges, for the
duration of their office alone, and shall not be enrolled in the Senate,
nor their names entered into the Album Senatorum.

3) Any citizen elected to the office of curule aedile, aedile plebis,
quaestor, or appointed as a major magistrate suffectus, or to the office
of provincial praetor and holding such office for not less than six
months, may be enrolled in the Senate at the discretion of the Censors
acting collegiately, who may then place their names in the Album
Senatorum. Such Senators enrolled under this provision shall be regarded
as enrolled in the Senate upon the entry of their names into the Album
Senatorum by the Censors.

4) The Consuls and the Tribuni Plebis shall nominate citizens to the
Senate for elevation into the Senate. The Senate may consider for
elevation those citizens thus nominated by the Consuls and the Tribuni
Plebis. Upon issuance of a Senatus Consultum elevating nominated
citizens into the Senate, those named citizens shall be enrolled as
Senators. The Censors shall then be bound to enter the names into the
Album Senatorum. Newly enrolled Senators shall be considered enrolled in
the Senate at the issuance of the Senatus Consultum, and need not await
the entry of their names into the Album Senatorum by the Censors before
assuming their honorum.

Subject:	[novaroma] P. L-M de Tribunicia Potestates
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:59:46 -0800

EX DOMO TRIBUNI PLEBIS

Salvete Quirites

The following Plebiscitum Labiena Morvia de Tribunicia Potestates is
hereby placed before the Comitia Plebis Tributa for consideration on a
pass/fail basis.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis

******************************

In accordance with the provisions of the Constitution in Sections
III.C, the Plebiscitum Labiena-Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates is hereby
enacted to further define Section III.C.2 and Section IV.7 of the
Constitution as relate to the powers, responsibilities, and duties of the
Tribuni Plebis within the Comitia Plebis Tributa:

Section I. Each Tribuni Plebis elected under the provisions of
Section III.C of the Constitution of Nova Roma in the Comitia Plebis
Tributa, shall serve a tenure of office for one year. Election of the
Tribuni Plebis shall be as follows:

1.a) Each individual Tribunus Plebis shall be elected as to a separate
office of the same magistracy, according to the procedures of the Comitia
Plebis Tributa.

1.b) The candidate receiving the most tribal votes for Tribunus Plebis
shall be considered the senior Tribunus Plebis. Where more than one
candidate receives an equal number of tribal votes, the Tribuni Plebis
shall decide among themselves who shall hold the senior position, and for
what duration. Should the Tribuni Plebis fail to reach agreement between
themselves, lots shall be drawn to determine who shall be the senior
Tribunus Plebis, and he or she shall hold that honor for the entire
period of six months, followed by a second period of six months where the
other Tribunus Plebis shall be regarded as the senior Tribunus Plebis.

Section II. All Tribuni Plebis shall be entitled to be proceeded by ten
viatores. The honors, powers, and duties of the Tribuni Plebis,
individually and/or collectively shall be as follows:

1) Each Tribunus Plebis shall hold a position for the duration of his
or her tenure in office that shall be considered sancrosanct. No
individual civis, no magistrate nor officer of Nova Roma shall fail to
yield to a Tribunus Plebis, or fail to honor an intercessio placed on
their actions by a Tribunus Plebis. Any individual, magistrate or officer
of Nova Roma to do so may be held to be in sacer under the judgement of a
court of law in Nova Roma.

2) On their part, the Tribuni Plebis shall at all times for the
duration of their tenure in office regard themselves in a sacred office,
conducting themselves in public and in private in an appropriate manner.
Failure of a Tribunus Plebis to act accordingly may himself or herself
be held to be in sacer under the judgement of a court of law in Nova
Roma.

3.a) In accordance with Section IV.A.7.a of the Constitution of Nova
Roma, each Tribuni Plebis shall have the power to pronounce intercessio
against the actions of any and all other magistrates, and any and all
edicta, Senatus consulta, and leges passed in comitia when they feel that
the spirit and letter of the Constitution has thereby been violated. In
the absence of a pronouncement of intercessio by a second Tribunus
Plebis, the assumption shall be that the issuance of an intercessio by
one Tribunus Plebis is a collegial pronouncement of intercessio.
3.b) Tribunician intercessio should be based solely on the provisions
of the Constitution, the leges, plebiscita, decreta and edicta of Nova
Roma. As such a nuntio of intercessio should provide the references to
the law upon which it is based. Where a Tribunus Plebis is of an opinion
that the spirit of the law has been violated, or where he holds the
opinion that the spirit of the law should be upheld over the letter of
the law, then the Tribunus Plebis should include the legal reasoning by
which he has arrived at his opinion. Due to the urgency of a situation,
expediency may not always allow a Tribunus Plebis to offer his reasons
for an intercessio at the time of its issuance. In such a case a
Tribunus Plebis should offer a written opinion of his intercessio in a
responsa within 72 hours following the issuance of the intercessio. Such
a responsa may then be referred to as a legal opinion at some future
date.
3.c) In accordance with Section IV.A.7.b of the Constitution of Nova
Roma, the exercise of tribunicia potestates, and/or duties performed by
any and all Tribuni Plebis shall not be subject to intercessio by any and
all other magistrates, including that of any other Tribunus Plebis, who
are by Section IV.A of the same instrument defined as magistrates.
Where a conflict arises between two Tribuni Plebis on the pronouncement
of an intercessio, the junior Tribunus Plebis should yield to the
decision of the current senior Tribunus Plebis. A junior Tribunus Plebis
should not issue a intercessio counter to an intercessio issued by a
senior Tribunus Plebis. A junior Tribunus Plebis should withdraw an
intercessio he has issued, upon notification by the senior Tribunus
Plebis of an intent to issue a counter intercessio. Only in a case where
the junior Tribunus Plebis can demonstrate the validity of his position
by sound legal argument should he not yield to the judgement of the
senior Tribunus Plebis.

4) Each Tribunus Plebis shall have the authority individually to call
the Comitia Plebis Tributa into assembly, and/or the Senate into session.

5) Each Tribunus Plebis shall have authority to sit in session with the
Senate, sine suffragio. Collectively, it shall be the duty of the
Tribuni Plebis to keep the citizenry informed as to items placed for
consideration before the Senate, the progress of proceedings on such
items, and the final vote on such items. The Tribuni Plebis shall not,
however, be responsible for reporting to the citizenry on the internal
procedures of the Senate, nor on any matter concerning an individual
civis, with respect to the privacy of that individual civis, nor on any
matter that a Consul has deemed to be of a private and confidential
matter.

6) All Tribuni Plebis shall be obligated to make themselves available
to all citizens of Nova Roma at all times. All Tribuni Plebis shall be
obligated to check for electronic messages sent by citizens, at least
once within every 48 hour period. A Tribunus Plebis unable to access his
electronic communications shall make every effort to so notify his
colleague(s) and/or the Consuli, and/or Praetori, however possible.

7) Each Tribunus Plebis shall have a power of auxilium which shall not
be subject to the intercessio of any magistrate, officer, or any other
Tribunus Plebis. The power of auxilium shall be that a Tribunus Plebis
may call for an immediate halt to any judicial procedure, tribunal, or
hearing, against an individual civis of any order, and have the
proceedings then removed to a higher authority for judgement. The power
of auxilium may be exercised by a Tribunus Plebis at any time during a
judicial procedure. For the duration of any such judicial proceedings,
the power of auxilium may be exercised by a Tribunus Plebis without being
subject to an intercessio by the senior Tribunus Plebis. The power of
auxilium may be exercised by a Tribunus Plebis following a judicial
decision, whereby the Tribunus Plebis would issue an intercessio against
the judicial decision and call for a right of provocatio on behalf of a
defendant, thus appealing the judicial decision to a higher judicial
authority. In this case the senior Tribunus Plebis may exercise
intercessio over the auxilium, intercessio, and provocatio made by the
Tribunus Plebis; the power of the senior Tribunus Plebis to so intercede
against a junior Tribunus Plebis does not abrogate a citizen's own right
of provocatio. The power of a Tribunus Plebis to exercise auxilium shall
not extend beyond the highest judicial authority within Nova Roma.

8) Each Tribunus Plebis, either individually or collegiately, shall
have the power of assertum. The power of assertum shall be that a
Tribunus Plebis may offer an opinion, written in the form of a rescriptum
or a responsio, on any matter that appears before any commission, court,
tribunal, or comitia. The power of assertum shall not be held to the
exclusion of the power auxilium in a matter of a trial of any civis. The
power of assertum shall not be subject to intercessio by any magistrate,
officer, another Tribunus Plebis, or by the senior Tribunus Plebis.

9.a) Each Tribunus Plebis shall have the power of coercitio. The power
of coercitio should be held subject solely to the intercessio of the
senior Tribunus Plebis. The power of coercitio shall be that a Tribunus
Plebis may call for the Comitia Plebis Tributa to assemble for the
purposes of trying legal cases under the provisions of the Constitution,
Section III.C.3.
9.b) In proclaiming the agere cum plebe (call to assemble) the Tribunus
Plebis must post to the Comitia Plebis Tributa, on an appropriate list,
the name of who is being charged as a defendant to the action, and all
charges and specifications to be made against the defendant. A minimum
of at least 48 hours prior to posting the agere cum plebe and the
charges, the Tribunus Plebis must notify any citizen being so charged as
a defendant, the Praetori, and the senior Tribunus Plebis, that such an
action is to take place. Failure to so notify all parties to be named as
defendants, the praetori, and/or the senior Tribunus Plebis shall be
grounds for any defendant or party to the proceeding to demand the
proceedings to be halted, and all charges dropped.
9.c) Any civis ordered to stand trial before the Comitia Plebis Tributa
may, either directly or through his or her agents, request that the
charges not be posted, and that the proceedings against him or her not be
conducted. The civis or his agents may provide any arguments of their
choosing to the issuing Tribunus Plebis for reconsideration. Prior to
posting, the Tribunus Plebis may withdraw the charges, notifying the
intended defendant, the agents of the intended defendant, the Praetori,
and the senior Tribunus Plebis. Alternatively the civis to be so charged
may appeal to the senior Tribunus Plebis to have the proceedings
postponed or cancelled, prior to the posting of any charges.
9.d) The senior Tribunus Plebis may exercise his power of intercessio
against any Tribuni Plebis' exercise of the coercitio at any time upon
notification, during the period prior to the posting of the charges, and
up to 72 hours after the posting of the charges.
9.e) The Tribunus Plebis initiating proceedings against any individual
civis shall be responsible for posting to the Comitia Plebis Tributa any
and all evidence against a defendant, in accordance with proper judicial
procedures.
9.f) Each and every Tribunus Plebis, collectively and individually, are
responsible for providing a defendant every opportunity to post evidence
in their defence to the Comitia Plebis Tributa.
9.g) A decision of the Comitia Plebis Tributa made against any
individual civis shall be subject to provocatio, and thus may be appealed
to the Comitia Populi Tributa.

10) Each Tribunus Plebis shall be entitled to issue nuntio
(announcements), denuntio (post hoc, propter hoc announcements),
rescripta (replies to questions on legislation, and to petitions by
litigants), and responsa (replies to requests for advice in legal
matters).

11) Each Tribunus Plebis shall be empowered to appoint Plebeian
apparitoria, to include but not be limited to, scribae, curatores, and
viatores as may be required in the performance of his duties, and to
assist the Comitia Plebis Tributa in the conduct of its affairs. Such
appoints as may be necessary shall be made by posting a nuntio to the
Comitia Plebis Tributa.

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:02:51 -0800

Salvete Quirites

Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia de Conuptia, Pass/Fail

Reaffirms the Lex Canuleia of 308 AUC (445 c.e.) establishing rights of
all cives, regardless of their orders, to engage in conuptia and
confarreatio. Reference to II.B. 1, 6.

Suasorius:

The Decemviri made an innovation to Roman law when they wrote into the
Twelve Tablets a prohibition on marriage between members of the Patrician
and Plebeian orders. By this act they nullified the status of many
citizens who had been born of parents of different orders. The Lex
Canuleia comes very early in the Republic's history. It reestablished
the right of marriage between Patricians and Plebeians without
interference, and gave back Patrician status to many cives the Decemviri
had attempted to take away.

What does this plebiscitum mean to Nova Roma today? For individual
citizens it means that they may define their relationships among
themselves without interference by any authorities set up under the
Constitution. They can then proclaim special friendships to the rest of
Nova Roma, or use the conuptio in any way they wish to make public.

The conuptio also allows relationships to be formed between gentes.
Just as marriages were used in the past to bind gentes, our conuptio can
be used to bridge gentes in Nova Roma. Such relations may be made with
one or more member from each gentes joining together either "in manu"
where cives might join another gens while retaining an identity with
their former gens, or "sine manu" where each member of a conuptio retains
membership in their own gens, as well as being welcomed into at the
functions of another gens. In this way the conuptio may be used by the
gentes to create a whole new form of interrelationships among our
citizens.

One future possibility is that Nova Roma could issue certificates
acknowledging such conuptio. Such documents would acknowledge and record
the conuptio between individuals, but would not be a marriage license or
a contract under the laws of any macronation in which the parties live.
It allows Nova Roma to begin issuing documents as a micronation. It
holds the potential for Nova Roma to collect fees for such documents, and
therefore will be used as a way to generate a small amount of income for
our res publica. How I see this working is very similar to marriage
certificates issued by churches. Such church certificates are accepted
as records of marriage, without being legal licenses for marriage
(depending on the laws of the governing macronation). Any civis who
would be married under the laws of their own macronation could therefore
request Nova Roma to also record and acknowledge the marriage inside our
res publica. Beyond that, friends could request such certificates of
conuptio as a way of proclaiming their relationships as well.

To complete this plebiscitum there will need to be made either an edict
or lex establishing that such hard copy official documents acknowledging
conuptio among our cives and gentes can only be issued by certain
magistrates. Most likely, in the future, these would be issued upon
request to our Quaestors, after fees were paid. Until then a simple
acclamation on any list will establish that a conuptio relationship
exists among our cives. While official documents will only be issued by
officials of Nova Roma, this plebiscitum does give individuals the
freedom to define themselves in relation to one another in Nova Roma.
In that it seeks to tap into the creativity of our cives in forming their
own community.

I urge every voter in the Comitia Plebis Tributa to approve the
Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Canuleia.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:02:38 -0800

Salvete Quirites


Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia, Pass/Fail

Reaffirms the Lex Caecilia Didia of 655 AUC (98 c.e.) prohibitng any
disparate provisions made between Nova Roma cives in any leges,
plebiscita, edicta, yet making exceptions for decreta of the Collegium
Pontificum and the Collegium Augurum, and the incorporating regula of
sodalitates. With reference to Section II.A.3; and II.B


Suasorius:

The Constituion of Nova Roma states that "Citizenship is open to anyone
regardless of ethnic heritage, genser, religious affiliation, or sexual
orientation (II.A.3)" Further it states that certain rights of the
citizens "shall be guaranteed" (II.B) while recognizing that other rights
might exist for citizens besides those enumerated in the Constitution.
While making such claims, the Constitution did not make provision for
where such guarantees were to apply. This new plebiscitum attempts to
address this issue in part.

With regard to the rights of any citizen, in any society, there
sometimes occurs a conflict between the rights of one or a group of
individuals, with the rights of another one or group of individuals.
This plebiscitum seeks to make clear that all citizens are provided the
same rights and same guarantees of those rights under Nova Roma law, in
all actions taken by magistrates and by comitia. It strikes down any
disparate provisions made in prior edicta, leges and plebiscita, and
prohibits any disparate provisions in the future. Thus it entitles
Praetors to adjudge cases where a conflict arises between a provision in
a previous edictum, lex or plebiscitum and the provisions of the
Constitution guaranteeing individual citizens their rights under the law.
It also entitles Tribuni Plebis to intercede against future edicta,
leges, or plebiscita on the basis that they would contain disparate
provisions.

At the same time however, this new plebiscitum attempts to distinguish
between equal protection under our laws, and a right of every citizen to
free association. It permits the Collegium Pontificum and the Collegium
Aurgurum to set qualifications for membership to their respective bodies,
and to the offices which they oversee. By tradition, certain religious
offices were reserved for members of Patrician gens, while others were
generally held by Plebeians. The plebiscitum allows the religious
collegia to maintain their traditions without interference from the Nova
Roma civil authorities.

Likewise, the new plebiscitum allows for sodalitates to be formed inside
Nova Roma with consideration for free association. Such sodalitates
would fall either under the constitutional provisions for guaranteed
rights if they were to be recognized by the Nova Roman Senate, or under
provisions established by the Collegium Pontificum were it to seek
recognition as a religious sodalitas. At the same time, quite
importantly, it disassociates Nova Roma institutions from other kinds of
sodalitates that our citizens are entitled to form on their own.

The Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Caecilia Didia restates and
further protects the rights of all our citizens under the laws of Nova
Roma. At the same time it protects Nova Roma itself in its institutions.
I urge all voters to approve this plebiscitum.

Vale

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Tribunicia Potestates
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:03:13 -0800

Salvete Quirites

Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates

Defines the honors, responsibilities, and duties of the Tribunes of the
Plebeians under IV.A.7 with regard to tribunician powers of intercessio,
calling of the Comitia Plebis Tributa and Senate, auxilium, assertum, and
coercitio; authority to issue nuntio, denuntio, rescripta and responsa;
and authority to appoint Plebeian scribae, curatores, and viatores.


Suasorius:

This plebiscitum does not change the powers held by the Tribuni Plebis
under the Constitution. Certain powers of the Tribunes are authorized
under the provisions of the Constitution, but were not clearly stated in
the past. Since the Tribunes are elected by the Comitia Plebis Tributa
(III.C.2) the Tribunes are officers of and responsible to the comitia.
How the Tribunes are to conduct themselves in office, relative to the
comitia and to the cives who elected them, is clearly under the
jurisdiction of the Comitia Plebis Tributa by Section III.C: "While it
shall be called to order by a tribune of the plebs, only the comitia
plebis tributa shall pass laws governing the rules by which it shall
operate internally."

One of the most important powers of the Tribunes are their ability to
issue intercessio. Under the Constitution (IV.A.7.a) tribunician
intercessio must be made collegiately. The plebiscitum describes the
relationship between Tribunes, designating one as a senior Tribune in
just the same manner as one Consul is designated senior to another. The
Comitia's plebiscitum provides guidelines on how Tribunes should work
together to make such intercessio in a collegial manner. The plebiscitum
does not increase nor does it limit the Tribunes in the power of
intercessio granted them by the Constitution.

Other powers of the Tribunes enumerated in the plebiscitum are present
in the Constitution, although not clearly delineated. The Constitution
states that the Comitia Plebis Tributa may sit as a court to try legal
cases (III.C.3). No procedures have ever been worked out on how trials
are to be conducted in any comitia in Nova Roma. The only ones
authorized by the Constitution to call the CPT to assemble are the
Tribuni Plebis (III.C and IV.A.7.d). Implied by this is a tribunician
power of coercitio as the Tribunes traditionally had in Roma Antiqua.
The story of how the Tribunes first exercised this power is given by Livy
for the year 304 AUC (449 b.c.e) when Tribune Genucius attempted to
arrest Consuls Manlius and Furius. The murder of Tribune Genucius and
the election by the Senate of Appius Claudius to quell the riots that
followed, lead to a Plebeian secessio and directly to the Valeria Horatia
Leges of theat same year that defined the rights and powers of the
Tribuni Plebis. What the plebiscitum attempts to do in defining this
power and laying out the procedures a Tribune is to follow, when calling
the CPT to assemble for this purpose, is designed to protect the rights
of individual citizens who might be called as defendants before the CPT.
In its provisions, the plebiscitum lays out procedures that are to be
followed in th CPT itself. Therefore the provisions of the plebiscitum
on the tribunician power of coercitio lays entirely within the boundaries
of the Constitution under Section III.C.

Unlike the Consuls, Praetors, and Aediles Curules who hold imperium, the
Censors and Tribunes do not. However in ancient Rome the Tribunes held
authority by virtue of the lex sacrorum that made their positions
sacrosanct. One result of this gave the Tribunes a power of offering
sanctuary to any citizen who managed to reach the home of a Tribune. The
plebiscitum deals with this traditional power of the Tribunes in
different ways. It does refer to the Tribunes having a sacred position.
It does mandate the Tribunes to behave in both their public and private
lives in a manner worthy of a sacred office. It does impose new
responsibilities on Tribunes with regard to making themselves available
to all citizens. Further, the plebiscitum enunciates two implicit powers
of a Tribune not before expressed. First is the power of auxilium
whereby a Tribune may act to defend the rights of any citizen in any
trial situation held in Nova Roma. The second is the power of assertum
whereby the Tribunes, under authority of IV.A.7.a to issue intercessio in
matters of constitutional questions, have an implicit responsibility of
protecting the provisions of the Constitution. What the power of
assertum amounts to is that the Tribunes may express their opinions as to
the constitutionality of any action, or pending action, before they would
issue an actual intercessio, or that they may act to offer their opinions
in a brief as a friend of the court in any pending trial. Again, the
plebiscitum does not add, limit or change the powers and authority of the
Tribunes. It merely defines and clarifies how such powers and
responsibilities that already exist are to be applied.

There is a minor oversight in the Constitution, in that it provides
authority for some magistrates to issue edicts necessary for the
performance of their duties, but does not make similar provision with
regard to a Tribune fulfilling his own duties. Having no imperium the
Tribunes may not issue edicts. However they are responsible for making
announcements of varied import. What types of announcements they may
make are delineated in the plebiscitum. Likewise the Constitution does
not authorize the Tribunes to appoint assistants in the same manner as
other magistrates under the Constitution. However, as the Constitution
does grant the Comitia authority to "pass laws governing the rules by
which it shall operate internally, " and due to the nature of the
Tribunes acting as officers of the Comitia, the Comitia Plebis Tributa
therefor has every right to create Plebeian offices for its internal
functions and to grant its officers a power to appoint such assistants as
would be necessary in the conduct of their duties to the Comitia.

Overall the Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia Potestates defines
the responsibilities, duties, and manner in which Tribunes may apply
their constitutional powers. It does this in a manner relating the
Tribunes to the Comitia, to one another and to the citizens of Nova Roma.
It offers the Tribunes guidelines in the application of their powers,
and in some ways limits the exercise of tribunician powers. Thereby the
authority of the Comitia Plebis Tributa over the Tribuni Plebis is
strengthened.

I urge all voters to approve the Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de
Tribunicia Potestates.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Flamen Cerealis et Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Draft Leges for Review
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:02:35 -0600 (CST)

Salve Flavi Vedi,

> Lex Vedia de Civium Rudimentum per Suffragio
>
> I. No applications for Citizenship are to be processed or approved while one
> or more of the Comitiae is in the process of undertaking a vote and/or
> election. Such applications may be accepted and held until the end of the
> election and/or vote in question, whereupon they are to be processed with
> all due dilligence and speed, subject to all other laws which may otherwise
> apply to the process.

With the larger number of elections we'll be having this year, as compared
to previous years, this robs the Censors of a considerable period of time
in which to do their work.

I suggest that instead, there be a law that citizens who are approved
during the election period not be granted voter codes, and not have
the ability to vote, until the election during which they gain
citizenship is over. This will allow the Censors to continue working
as much as usual during the election, but they'll simply leave the
voter code field blank.

(Right now, the voter codes are created and assigned by a program that
I run manually, just before each election starts.)

> II. During the time when applications for Citizenship are not processed as
> described under this law, the Curator Araneum shall post an announcement
> where individuals completing the application for Citizenship may reasonably
> be expected to see it, explaining the situation and giving a reasonable
> estimate of when the prospective Citizens may expect to have his or her
> application processed.

This happens already, but I have no objection to making it officual.
The new applicant can still complete the application process, and
the record is written to the database as usual - but the expectation
is that the Censores won't be doing anything with it.


> Lex Vedia de Ratione Edictium
>
> Such edicta shall be posted in the Tabularium by the curator araneum as soon
> as practical.

I thought the title was Curator Araneae... am I going to have to get
my business cards reprinted? :-)

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Propraetor, Lacus Magni
Curator Araneae et Senator

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:02:27 -0800

Salvete Quirites


Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Ovinia de Senatoria, Pass/Fail

Reaffirms Lev Ovinia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) defining terms and procedure
in the provisions of IV.A.1d, IV.A.2.c and V.A on the elevation of "all
the best men and women of all ranks and orders" to the Senate as "the
repository of experience and wisdom."


Suasorius:

The Constitution refers to the Senate as our res publica's "repository
of experience and wisdom" without defining how it was to be composed.
The Lex Vedia Senatoria then attempted to establish how new members were
to be elevated into the Senate. The Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex
Ovinia de Senatoria takes this one step further to clarify the process
for the various ways "all our best men and women" may be elevated to the
Senate.

The historian S. Pompeius Festus mentions how at one time Senators were
chosen by consuls from among their closest friends among the Patricians,
and by the Tribunes with Consulor Powers from among the Plebeians. Later
the Lex Pubilia mandated that one censor had to be Plebeian, just as
other leges established that one Consul had to be Plebeian, so that the
process of elevation into the Senate came from both segments of society.
He then relates how in 339 c.e. that the Tribune Ovinius passed a law
which "bound the censors by oath to enrol in the senate the best men of
all ranks (p.290 L)" and irregardless of what order they happened to
belong. The new plebiscitum updates the wording, to include both men and
women, and applies it to the situation under Nova Roman law.

The Lex Vedia simply stated that the individuals elected to the offices
of consul, censor or praetor should "automatically be included in the
Album Senatorum." The language used here and elsewhere in the Lex Vedia
was not always clear on how or when new Senators might be considered
enrolled into the Senate. Thus the Lex Vedia did not stipulate at what
point new Senators could be regarded as members of the Senate and
granted full rights and privileges of membership. This plebiscitum
attempts to clarify the procedure further.

In practise our consuls have in the past nominated candidates to the
Senate for elevation. The new plebiscitum recognizes this unwritten
practise and carries it one step further in making the Tribuni Plebis
also responsible for making recommendations to the Senate. The Senate of
course is free to nominate and elevate candidates of its own choosing and
need not rely on the recomendations of either the Consuls or the
Tribunes. The clarification made by the plebiscitum entitles the Senate
to elevate cives into its membership without relying on the
recomendations or approval of magistrates, just as the Collegium
Ponitificum is authorized to select cives into its membership.

The Comitia Plebis Tributa has a vested interest in seeing that this
important advisory body of the Senate has its new members be expediently
enrolled into membership. Under Section I.B of the Constitution,
plebescita and leges of comitia hold higher legal authority than Senatus
consulta or any magisterial edicta. Thus the comitia may offer
guidleines and make provisions which oversee the implementation of
constitutional laws by lesser authorities. By clarifying those parts of
the Lex Vedia Senatoria to which it addresses, this plebiscitum enhances
the Constitution and leges, reinforcing the spirit of the law as written
and the spirit of the traditions of the Republic. The plebiscitum
clarifies that cives may be elevated into membership in the Senate
through three methods: election by the Comitia Centuriata, election by
the Censors, or election by the Senate itself.

This plebiscitum works for the best interests of all citizens. I urge
all voters to approve passage of the Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmation
Lex Ovinia.

Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Adfirmatio Leges Publilia et Icilia
From:	Gian G Reali <piscinus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:03:00 -0800

Salvete Quirites

Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Icilia, Pass/Fail

Reaffirms the Lex Icilia of 259 AUC (471 c.e.) prohibiting any
magistrate from interfering or disrupting the calling forth or procedures
taken within the Comitia Plebis Tributa. Reference to II.B.3, and
III.C.1 and 2.

Plebiscitum de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex Publilia, Pass/Fail

Reaffirms the Lex Publilia of 414 AUC (339 c.e.) that a call for
assembly of the Comitia Plebis Tributa may be made without prior patrum
auctoris or auspicia. Reference to III.C and IV.A.7.


Suasorius:

In the Early Republic all proposed leges brought before the different
comitia had to be first approved by magistrates and the Senate. Attempts
were made to do the same to the Comitia Plebis after it formed in 494
b.c.e. In 471b.c.e. the comitia was reformed by the Plebiscitum Publilia
Voleronis into the Comitia Plebis Tributa. The Plebians had taken it
upon themselves to alter both the way they were to be organized, and the
way they were to vote. From that time on, the comitia became an
independent legislative body. The Lex Icilia sought to confirm that
independence by allowing the comitia to assemble without magisterial
interference. The later Leges Publiliae of 339 b.c.e. further
established that independence through no longer requiring a patrum
auctoritas be made in advance of the comitia voting.

Both of your current Tribuni Plebis have made it their task in the year
2754 AUC to develop the CPT as one part of the legislative branch in Nova
Roma. By offering initiatives and plebiscita to transform the CPT, we
hope to also stimulate the other comitia to become active. Becoming a
fully functional legislative body will require the CPT to become
independent in its own right. These two proposed plebiscita, based on
historical precedent, and reaffirming ancient laws, seek to reestablish
that independence of the CPT. The plebiscita attempt to clarify and
define how the powers of magistrates relate to the Comitia Plebis
Tributa. The reaffirmation of the Lex Icilia does not eliminate the
authority of any magistrate to call their respective comitia to assemble.
Particular attention is paid to the powers of a Plebeian Tribune in
relation to all the comitia. Here the one plebiscitum reaffirming the
ancient Lex Icilia does not limit the powers set for Tribuni Plebis by
the Constitution. Nor does it add any powers. But it does set specific
boundaries which previously werenot stipulated in the Constitution. In
much the same way as the Plebiscitum Labiena Moravia de Tribunicia
Potestates places the authority of the Comitia Plebis Tributa over the
Tribuni Plebis as its officers in relation to itself, this plebiscitum
sets a boundary on how the Tribunes may act in relation to the other
comitia once they have assembled. What is then established by this
plebiscitum is that once assembled a comitia cannot be interfered with by
any magistrate.

Under the Lex Vedia voting must begin the day following posting of any
proposed lex or plebiscitum. Essentially all of the comitia are
presently called to merely rubber stamp the initiatives placed before
them. Your current Tribuni Plebis are today trying to change that. We
hope to alter the way that the CPT relates to its own officers so that
they become more responsive to the members of the comitia. The Tribunes
and Plebeian Aediles are officers of the CPT as they are elected solely
by the CPT (III.C.2). They should be responsible to the CPT alone. The
CPT should not be dependent upon them. The one plebiscitum reaffirming
the Lex Icilia thus sets a time limit of 72 hours between the call for a
comitia to assemble and the time it actually assembles. This allows the
Tribunes to exercise their tribunician intercessio as provided by the
Constitution. However it also prevents any magistrate, including the
Tribunes, from having the comitia disbanded once assembled. The Tribunes
would effectively chair the comitia once it had assembled, not control
it. That is precisely the relationship outlined by the Constitution at
Section III.C where it states that "while it shall be called to order by
a tribune of the plebs, only the comitia plebis tributa may pass laws..."


By other initiatives taken by the current Tribunes, every citizens will
be able to directly communicate to members of the comitia, giving voice
to the comitia's members of their own concerns. In effect, by opening
the CPT list, and providing a Comitia Plebis chat room, and establishing
scheduled times when the Tribunes will be available for direct
communication, the Tribunes are making themselves responsive to the
citizenry. The citizens are being given an opportunity to exercise an
individual right of initiative. The intended effect will be to allow
every Plebeian cives, as a member of the CPT, to act as a memeber of
parliment in their own right. This will mean that debate on issues will
generate new plebiscita, rather than new plebiscita generating debate.


The current Tribunes have also made a further initiative by which they
hope to set a precedent. All initiatives have been made for all citizens
equally. The CPT list
and the Comitia Plebis chat room were opened to Patricians as well as
Plebeians. Even though the current provisions of the Constitution do not
permit members of the Patrician order to vote in the CPT, we have given
Patricians equal access to the Plebeian Tribuni Plebis, and have given
them the same opportunity to initiate discussion on the CPT list. Thus
Patricians have in effect also been given a right of initiative sine
suffragio in the CPT. In making this initiative the Tribunes hope to
stimulate Patricians and Plebeians alike, joining together to further
develop the other comitia. We intend to work with all citizens in
further developing the CPT into a model legislative body, whose example
the other comitia will want to follow.

I urge every voter to approve the Plebiscita de Iterum Adfirmatio Lex
Icilia and Lex Publilia.


Valete

Cn. Moravius Piscinus
Tribunus Plebis

Subject:	[novaroma] Comitia Centuriata
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 23:22:34 -0000

I'm breaking my comments and the Consul's reply regarding the Comitia
Centuriata from my post "Powers of the Tribunes", and starting a
seprate thread.

> > According to Livy one of the Centuries was for the head
> > count. If we applied the same princeples to the Centuries as we do
to
> > the tribes, we could assign all citizens who fail to vote to the
Capti
> > Censi as well as to the Urban tribes. This would't have any effect
on
> > thier points, and they could regain thier place in the classes by
> > voting this December. It would open up places in the higher
classes
> > for those who are active though.
>
> Now _this_ is an interesting idea! Can you dig up an exact reference
for it?
> On what basis were Citizens in Roma Antiqua assigned to this "head
count"
> Century? Was it merely all those who didn't meet the minimum
property
> requirements for the rest of the Centuries, or was there some other
> criterion? Was it considered part of one of the five classes, or was
it some
> sort of supernumerary century? How do you see this impacting the
problem of
> already-undersized Centuries; wouldn't it just exaccerbate it?
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul

Placing all the citizens who failed to vote would appear to have a
major impact on the undersized Centuries, but continuing to include
them only creates an illusion that there are more citizens in the
Centuries than there really are.

Let's look at the results for Consul in the last election.

CONSUL
37 - Germanicus 1, 3, 5, 7, 11, 21, 23, 25, 31,
32, 40, 41, 43, 46, 59, 82, 86, 89, 97, 108,
122, 125, 129, 133, 138, 140, 141, 156, 157, 161,
167, 172, 178, 183, 184, 190, 191
34 - Cassius 2, 4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 28, 29, 38, 45,
68, 87, 88, 92, 94, 101, 106, 112, 116, 121, 124,
134, 139, 142, 151, 152, 154, 158, 164, 174, 180,
182, 186, 193
29 - Vado 6, 15, 17, 18, 27, 33, 49, 51, 55, 57,
58, 63, 102, 119, 127, 128, 149, 155, 159, 163,
165, 166, 168, 173, 175, 181, 185, 187, 189
16 - TIE 30, 34, 39, 85, 103, 130, 131, 132, 143,
169, 170, 171, 177, 179, 188, 192

Adding the number of Centuries each canidate carried, 37 + 34 + 29 =
100 Centuries, plus the 16 tied Centuries totals 116 Centuries. 77 of
the Centuries failed to vote for Consul, in effect these were empty
Centuries.

An Excert from
http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLASS_365/Early.Const.html#Cent.Assem
bly
********************************************************************
This was the main assembly of the early Republic. It elected
magistrates with imperium, decided whether the Roman people should go
to war and judged capital cases. It was in origin the Roman army drawn
up outside the city (it could not meet within the pomerium). It was
organized by centuries, which were originally military units of 100
men, but in the form in which we first meet it in the early Republic,
it was no longer organized by any military considerations and had been
considerably modified from whatever form it had had when it actually
was composed of military units.

It consisted of193 centuries, or voting units. 170 were distributed
unequally among the five Servian census classes, that is, of those who
property was rated between 100,000 and 11,000 asses (an as being a
small coin). Of the centuries assigned to each class, half were given
to those of the age of full military service (17-45) and half to older
normally assigned only to garrison duty (46-60). Thus, the votes of
the older many outweighed those of the younger. All those with
property rated below the minimum figure (the majority of the
population) were grouped into a single century. (The people who did
not meet the lowest qualication for the fifth census and voted in this
single century were called the proletarii in Latin, the term
signifying that the served by the state by providing children [proles]
rather than by serving in the military.) In addition, 18 centuries
were given to men serving in the cavalry. Since owning a horse was an
expensive proposition, these cavalrymen were presumably young men who
would otherwise belong to the first census class. The five remaining
classes were given over to various professional services in the army
like carpenters and horn players (on what basis they were chosen for
this honor is not known).

Here is a table showing the distribution of the votes in the five
classes for the period up 242, when a slight modification was made in
the number of centuries assigned to these classes.


I 40 Junior 40 Senior 80 Total
II 10 Junior 10 Senior 20 Total
III 10 Junior 10 Senior 20 Total
IV 10 Junior 10 Senior 20 Total
V 15 Junior 15 Senior 30 Total
Supernumerary
Cavalry 18
Professionals 4
Proletarii 1
Grand Total 193
*******************************************************************

The modification made in 242 removed 10 Centuries from the first
class, and added 2 centuries to each of the other 4 classes
maintaining the even division between Junior and Senior Centuries.

The 18 Centuries of the Cavalry consisted of the wealthiest citizens
of Roma, men who could afford to not only equip themselves, but also
buy and equip a war horse. They were the elite of the first class and
this is where the Ordo Equester originated. Since the Cavalry can be
considered the 18 leading Centuries of the first class Prior the the
reform of 242 the first class had 98 centuries total, one more than
the 97 required to elect the Consul. If the 18 and the first class
agreed, they could name the Consuls before the Second Class was called
on to Vote.

Using the division of Classes into Senior and Junior Groups lets look
at the arrangement of the Centuries in Nova Roma.

Currently the Lex Vedia Centuriata divides the classes
A. Class I shall have 55 centuries;
B. Class II shall have 47 centuries;
C. Class III shall have 39 centuries;
D. Class IV shall have 30 centuries;
E. Class V shall have 22 centuries.

This could be amended to
Class I shall have 28 Junior Centuries and 27 Senior Centuries.
Class II shall have 24 Junior Centuries and 23 Senior Centuries.
Class III shall have 20 Junior Centuries and 19 Senior Centuries.
Class IV shall have 15 Junior Centuries and 14 Senior Centuries.
Class V shall have 10 Junior Centuries and 9 Senior Centuries.
The Proletarii shall have 2 Centuries.

Citizens who fail to vote in December would be assigned to the
Proletarii.

No Citizens shall be assigned to the Senior Centuries untill Nova
Roma's population of Citizens belonging to the classes reaches 500
Citizens. (100 Citizens per Class).

This smaller number of Centuries would preserve the relative power of
the classes, and help solve the problem of undersized Centuries. Since
the Comitia originated in the Army, and each Century originaly had 100
men, the number could not have reached 193 untill Roma was large
enough to have 19,300 men in her Army. Prior to this Roma's Army had
to have been smaller, so there would have been fewer Centuries in the
very early days, so there is a very old precedent for having fewer
Centuries than the traditional 193, though it's so far back in time
there are no records to document it.

Lucius Sicinius Drusus