Forum Romanum


Subject:	[novaroma] Poll results for novaroma
From:	novaroma@--------
Date:	10 May 2001 00:36:25 -0000

The following novaroma poll is now closed. Here are the
final results:

POLL QUESTION: How much time and effort would you be
willing and/or able to devote to a
gathering of the entire citizen body of
Nova Roma in one place for one grand
festival?

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Several Minutes and an Afterthought, 3 votes, 8.11%
- Several Hours and some Talk Time, 3 votes, 8.11%
- Several Days or more and A lot of Genuine Interest, 19 votes, 51.35%
- I am really interested in this and think we should discuss it more., 11 votes, 29.73%
- Dunno, don't care., 1 votes, 2.70%

For more information about this group, please visit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/


Subject:	[novaroma] A Response to the Utter Pap
From:	iasonvs_serenvs@--------
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 01:10:03 -0000

Greetings all,

For more than a week I have added nothing to our collective
conversation. I wanted some perspective on the posts, the topics,
and the persons writing them. I wanted to do so without clouding my
own perspective with my words.

I have been a citizen of Nova Roma for about three months.

I have come to this conclusion...

We will never amount to anything remotely Roman.

We are tired little moderns dispensing internet swill for our own
intellectual masturbation.

I do not offer these words as offense to any person or party. I have
come, in so much as this medium allows, to respect the experience and
words of a number of my fellow citizens. Nor do I gainsay the
contributions of those who obviously tried so hard to drag the mud of
modernity into the light of a noble past.

We are what we are.

To the magistrates of Nova Roma, to those of you who have devoted
your time and money, your interest and effort, I offer my thanks and
gratitude. This too must be said - my esteem does not come gratis.
In reading the proposed laws, and those voted upon in the past, I
cannot help but be tickled by the large play of the absurd. Why try
so hard to wield so petty a power on men and women who will never
obey you? The very language of the proposed legislation smacks so
terribly of dominance and submission. It says, in the plainer tongue,
"See me, I wear the magenta. I can tell you what name you will have.
See me, I am a massa..."

Well woop-dee-doo.

A wee bit harsh? Maybe. You are not exempt from scrutiny. I will
not, however limited or expanded my future participation, allow
myself to slip into anomie In Any Community.

To the Priests, Priestesses, Poets, Writers, Wanderers, and future
like, remember that spirit and art are the mirror to power.

To those with whom I have shared a moment, a passing word, or a days
long debate, agreement or no, I have been bettered by it...and I hope
I may one day repay you the favor.

To those of you nasty, vicious, niddling, needling, malicious, bored,
belittling little pettiness-mongerers: I take consolation in the
wisdom of my grandmother...your kind is everywhere, and everywhere
despised. Each ill-considered word, each thoughtless attact, each
unreflected reaction reflects the baseness of your mortal soul.
Little all parasites, you infect the body that best suits you. Still,
you are found out. The cure lies in the problem. I offer you an
antidote made of your own tired flesh. Each attack, each disturbing
little intrusion of yours into the forum of civility and dignity
begets another citizens who swears to rise to the challenge of a free
dignity. I echo this challenge to all comers, and every taker. Each
time this den of ingnorance spits out another ill-mannered
troglodyte, let us respond with the combined force of our good
breeding, common cause, and dignitas. They will not withstand it, no?

To Ponitfex Maximus Cassius, I am forever in your debt for you
original and divine inspiration. Though it appears that we do no
often agree, you seem to me a man of quiet dignity and humor. I
offer you my highest gift, my respect.

To Legatus Minucius Hadrianus, it was a pleasure meeting with you in
person. I have come away from that outing happy to have met a man
with who I share the same faith and foundation, who speaks his mind
freely and intelligently.

To Vesta Maxima Lucilla Fortunata, as always, She shines on you. i
hope your recovery goes with her graces.

To Lucius Sicinius, Procopius, Draco, the Lady Natalina, Oppius,
Labienus, Aeternia, Salix Astur, the messers Appollonii, and to any
other I have so errantly forgotten...agreement has never been
necessary. I honor you for your sound contributions, your sense,
your sensibility, your passions and your inspiring engagement in the
issues.

To Proconsul Minucius Audens, I hope some day to meet you, and offer
you my deepest esteem. Your words are never less than wise,
measured, and complete unto themselves. I do not doubt for a moment
that you are Our Cincinnatus.

And to all of my fellow Novaromani, a grano salis - the wolves are
not the enemy. It is the sheep who wish to be wolves whom we must
guard ourselves against.

Vigilance,

Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs
Paterfamilias Serena
Nova Roman

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Vote
From:	Piparskeggr Ullarsson <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Wed, 09 May 2001 20:58:10 -0500

Ave Titus Octavius,

Kristoffer From wrote:
>
> Salvete, cives Romani.
>
> There is a matter I wish to bring under public scrutiny regarding the
> upcoming vote. Before you lay down your vote, be sure you have
> contemplated all the ramifications of the lex in question.
> Do not vote for or against a lex just because (excision)
>
> In short, be sure you know your own feelings on a given matter, and
> don't give in to "public opinion", but rather to your own conscience.
>
> Valete,
>
> Titus Octavius Pius,
>

Bravo, very nicely written.
A good point of logic and reason, well taken here.

--
===========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
Quæstor, Legate, Dominus Sodalis
My homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] site URL's
From:	Marilyn Traber <margali@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 07:58:38 -0400

Let me check into the Cult of Ceres, since I live on a farm, it
might be a good temple to found ;-)
margali
Hyapatia Asinia
~~~~~~~~~~
the quote starts here:
It seems that we don't have a Temple of Ceres.
What are the formalities than need to be accomplished
to build a official NR Virtual Temple?
The ancient Temple of Ceres was build by a
Aedile(Aedes meaning Temple).

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rogator Missing?
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 12:48:59 -0400

Salvete Omnes: If anyone has any information on the present status of Cornelius Moravius Laurentibus, could they please get in touch with the Rogators. Or if C. M. Laurentibus sees this post, please get in touch with us. It is now closing in on a month and a half since we have heard from Laurentibus, and we need to discuss the election and voting on leges that is upcoming. Gratias tibi ago.
Ave atque vale, ... A. Cato, ... Rogator

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Mistakes in Gladiator
From:	"Diana Meridia Aurelia" <diana_h@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 17:38:26 -0000

Salvete Quirites,
in the same vein you might enjoy this:

http://www.nitpickers.com/?yhnws
Search for G.. Gladiator.
There's plenty of it.

Bene valete,
Diana Meridia Aurelia

--- In novaroma@--------, Piparskeggr Ullarsson <catamount_grange@i...>
wrote:
> Avete Omnes,
>
> Got a coupla chuckles from this and a coupla good laffs.
>
> http://www.films.movie-mistakes.com/letters/g/gladiator.htm
>
> --
> ===========================================
> In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
> - Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
> Cives, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
> Quæstor, Legate, Dominus Sodalis
> My homestead
> http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
> Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Possible Temple of Ceres
From:	Marilyn Traber <margali@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 14:53:54 -0400

OK, if you nip over to my Nova Roma page, I have put up a Temple
to Ceres page on a temporary basis. I would like a bit of
feedback to see if I can submit it to Marcus Arminius Maior who
is our Aedilis Plebis

Margali
Hyapatia Asinia

http://www.geocities.com/margali99maincom/NovaRoma.htm
or directly to the temple page
http://www.geocities.com/margali99maincom/TempleofCeres.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Book Title Finalist Poll :o)
From:	CW2ShaneEvans@--------
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 13:02:10 EDT

First, I want to thank everyone who contributed their ideas. I was
overwhelmed when I received close to 150 potential titles from my fellow
reenactors. I have chosen the 12 best titles, and I am submitting them for a
"final round" to see which one people like the best. Please look over each
of these carefully and send me the number of the title which you think would
be best for this sort of book. Keep in mind that the book is designed to
help reenactors better their hobby, educate the stupid, and address problems
we face such as hipocracy, liberal media, and the occasional wacko trying to
ruin the hobby. I am almost finished with the book (3 more chapters, and
adding pics), and then it will go to several publishers with a prayer that
one will agree to publish it. Once it gets that far, I will post to everyone
when it will be published, and where you can get it. Thank you again to
everyone who contributed their ideas, and to all my friends who have written
me with words of thanks (for writing it) and encouragement to finish it.

Shane

1. Reliving History: Reenacting and Learning from Our Past

2. "Once and Again: Living History and Military Reenacting"

3. History Alive!--a view of the reenactor's experience

4. Reflections of the Past: Reenacting in America

5. "Lest We Forget, Reenacting History for the Future"

6. "Lest We Forget"
The Military Reenacting/Living History Movement

7. REMEMBERING THE FALLEN : A STUDY OF MILITARY LIVING HISTORY

8. Presenting the Past
a Handbook to the Reenactment phenomena

9. "The Compendium of Historical Reenactment"

10. " Gone but not Forgotten; Reenacting History Through the Ages"

11. "World history through American eyes"

12. "Old Wars Remembered, Reenacting in America"

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Heading Down South (Waaaay Down South....)
From:	"Adrian Gunn" <shinjikun@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 15:25:06 -0400

Salvete,

I'm heading down to Provincia Argentia for two weeks tomorrow for my annual
Army National Guard (reserve) training, so I'll be out of the loop until May
25th when I return. We're flying into Buenos Aires then down to southern
Patagonia (Prov. de Santa Cruz) to Rio Gallegos to train with an Argentine
Mechanized Infantry Battalion. I'm going to bring my Nova Roma flag with me,
and when we head up to the National Park Los Glaciares for our cold weather
training, I'll take a photo of the flag up on the glacier, and post it on
the Nova Britannia website ^_^ Wish me luck!
Valete,
C. Minucius Hadrianus
Legatus of Massachusetts

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Heading Down South (Waaaay Down South....)
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 15:40:27 -0400

Salve C. Minuci Hadriane: Best wishes for your trip down and back. I hope
you have a safe flight and will look forward to seeing the picture. Vale,
... A. Cato, ... Rogator
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Gunn" <shinjikun@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 3:25 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Heading Down South (Waaaay Down South....)

> Salvete,
>
> I'm heading down to Provincia Argentia for two weeks tomorrow for my
annual
> Army National Guard (reserve) training, so I'll be out of the loop until
May
> 25th when I return. We're flying into Buenos Aires then down to southern
> Patagonia (Prov. de Santa Cruz) to Rio Gallegos to train with an Argentine
> Mechanized Infantry Battalion. I'm going to bring my Nova Roma flag with
me,
> and when we head up to the National Park Los Glaciares for our cold
weather
> training, I'll take a photo of the flag up on the glacier, and post it on
> the Nova Britannia website ^_^ Wish me luck!
> Valete,
> C. Minucius Hadrianus
> Legatus of Massachusetts
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	R: [novaroma] Digest Number 1381
From:	"Prometheus" <fresco@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 21:25:29 +0200

> Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 19:33:25 +0200
> From: "S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
> Subject: Re: Dacian Wars Question
>
> Salve Sura!
> All I know about the Dacian Wars is that both Traianus and Hadrianus
> have been involved in them, and that they were among the most bloody >
genocides the Romans ever committed.

Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
The Dacian wars were difficult and bloody because Rome fought against a
well organized rich end powerful state also headed by a king who was very
smart both militarly and diplomatically.
There was no genocide at all.
The Dacian people remained very numerous in Dacia, but was quickly
assimilated , by the presence of 30,000 to 40 thousand legionnaires (about
10% or over of the whole Roman army), by veterans, by some other colonists
on their own, but mostly by agricultural colonists sent by the Republic for
military reasons, one of the few cases of such organised colonisation in
roman times.
Dacians were also assimilated by superior culture, by law, by a religion
which included and assimilated local deities, by reasonable policies and all
in the frame of many basic similarities between roman and dacian cultures,
(including similarities in the languages at least according to serious
scholars of present Romania).
It is for this reason that 19 centuries after the roman conquest the
Romanian people of present days Dacia calls Himself Romanian and their land
ROMANIA, and of course is proud of his roman heritage and to speak a
neolatin language.

S. Apollonius Draco
>Even today, Dacia is known as Rumania, the language spoken there is a >
language derived from Latin, and not the Slavic
> language you'd expect from a country that lies in Eastern Europe.

Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
Dear friend, at the end of the empire South Eastern Europe was just all
divided between latin speakers(north west and greek speakers south east,
plus some illyrians speakers of an other laguage of the indoeuropean family
(perhaps closer to greek than to others) ancestor of present Albanian.
NO SLAVIC PEOPLE was yet seen there!
NOT a single one, not even as a turist!
Inclusive Tours for SLAVIC hordes began in the Balkans
only around the year 700.

After many other barbarian peoples invasions already destroyed the defences
of Rome and Costantinople, only then arrived all the slavic hordes from
which would stem present settlers of most of half Balcan peninsula and most
of Europe North and East of the Carpathian mountains range.
The barbarian invasion of SLAVIC tribes arrived at the beginning of the
seventh century of our vulgar era.
Besides West Slavic peoples and East Slavic peoples (living North or East
of the Carpathians, and the Slovaks just on a part of the Carpathian
mountains) the ethnographers describe the South Slavic family of peoples and
of languages, and they include:
Slovenia (language Slovenian)
Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia all speaking Serbo-Croatian, (Croatian and
Bosnians writing it in Latin alphabet, while Serbians writing in Cyrillic
alphabet).
Bulgaria speaking Bulgarian (written in Cyrillic)
Macedonia speaking macedonian (written in Cyrillic)
which most people considered a bulgarian dialect (until now when with the
recent independence of the state of Macedonia it is being credited more of
being a separate language)

The barbarian invasion of MAGYAR speaking tribes arrived at the beginning
of the tenth century of our vulgar era.
The Hungarian state is their heir.
Magyar or Hungarian language has nothing to do with slavic languages, being
related to the languages of the people of Finland, of Estonia, of Turkey
and of all Mongolians peoples.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

> Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 12:44:49 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
> Subject: Re: Dacian Wars Question
>
> Salvete omnes; et salve, Sura.
>
> Dacia corresponded to the modern Romanian provinces of Oltenia and
> Transilvania. It was conquered by Emperor Traianus in 106 CE
> (DCCCLIX A.U.C.), after a long and hard campaign.
>

Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
Add Dobrugia East of the Danube and Delta of the Danube (Dobrudja) at least,
and,
*open to debate*, many other parts of Romania like Muntenia (east
Wallachia) South Moldova, Banate (west), depending also to the periods.

Gnaeus Salix Astur
> The reasons for this campaig laid in the numerous raids that Dacians
> (tribes of Celtic stock) made across the Danube,
> into the Roman Empire.

Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
The Dacians were part of the hindoeuropean family, NO DOUBT about it.
I am Italian and Romanian by citzenship passionnate of history and I never
ever read something like that Dacians were Celts or close to Celts.

The most credited theory isi that they were part of the TRACIAN subfamily.
The second best quoted theory says they must be considered a subfamily
apart, even if very close to the tracians.
The third theory I heard about recently is that they were a family apart,
apart, but very very close to italians (but not far from tracians)

My conclusion is that they were a sizable part of the TRACIAN sub family,
well delimited geographically and culturally important, so that it would not
be too strange to consider them apart.
Of course being IndoEuropeans had close resemblance with the nearest
IndoEuropeans and were not too different from others (like Celts, Germans,
Italians, Illirians etc)
But cannot be labelled as CELTS.

Gnaeus Salix Astur
> It was, initially, a punishment campaign, but it became a conquest war.
> Dacia was fully romanized, and when Emperor Aurelianus evacuated
> the Provincia (271 CE),
> many dacoroman peasants stayed there.

Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
Aurelian and following Roman and Constantinopolitan Bizantine emperors
manteined large beachheads north of the Danube (and of course mantained
fully the Dobrugia province, so called Scytia minor).

Gnaeus Salix Astur
> many dacoroman peasants stayed there.
>From their fusion with slavic peoples was formed the Romanian people.

Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia:
The DacianRomanian people was formed in the second and third century.
Slavic hordes invaded Dacia in the seventh century but few settled north of
the Danube and so they were absorbed by the Daco-Romans.
The contrary happened south of the Danube (in Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia)
where most of the Slavic peoples settled.
Still very large minorities of Traco-Romans (so called Aromenians)existed
until the 2nd world war.
Nowdays they are fewer and fewer and they are being assimilated forcefully
in Serbia, and Greece,
less forcefully in Albania, Bosnia, Macedonia,Croatia, Bulgaria, Hungary.
They are being assimilated forcefully also in Ukraine and Transnistria.

Best friendly regards
Marcus Prometheus Decius Golia

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Society and the Individual
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 21:09:27 +0200

Salvete Omnes!

I would like to make a few comments on a basic point of political
philosophy which seems to be relevant to many of our current
discussions, and that is the good of the individual versus the good of
the whole society.

It has been suggested that we must find a balance between the two, and
that we must be sure to give the whole its proper rights. I think that
in our present context this is a false dichotomy that cannot lead to
sound political judgements.

Of course there are times when we must consider the principle of the
greatest good for the greatest number, and perhaps do something that is
disadvantageous to a given individual - within limits. As in taxation or
quarantining or suppressing crime, for example.

However, we must always keep in mind that although a commonwealth has
its own abstract existence, its real nature is that of individuals
acting together in certain ways with certain ideas about their
collective relationship. And it is ultimately a creation of those
individuals which exists specifically in order to give certain
satisfactions and advantages to them. They and only they are the final
objects of the actions of the collective, because the purpose of the
collective is to benefit its members.

Now, what we see in some justification of recent proposals is the idea
that the collective whole matters - as of course it *does* matter, since
a prospering whole can be more advantageous to the constituent members.
However, the actual proposals being made have little or no genuine
advantages for the collective, and that makes the whole argument
irrelevant.

It does not, for example, create any advantage *for the community* to
force people to accept names of a gender opposite to that which they
feel themselves to be and which they use in their social relations. On
the contrary, it makes some valuable and sincere people feel alienated
from a community and may even keep or drive them and their contributions
away. That is a simultaneous *harm* to the community and to the affected
individuals. It is thus not a case where a dichotomy of advantage and
harm applies between the individual and the collective. Both suffer
together.

Likewise, effectively punishing people who leave the community and wish
to come back - and doing so in rather arrogant and offensive language in
places - is not in the interests of the community. Having people with
the interest to come back do so probably will in most cases amount to
bringing back people with real interest and a strong emotional and
personal commitment - probably one considerably greater than those who
sign up and remain citizens, but are utterly passive and inactive.

Thus the limitations on these voluntary leavers who become voluntary
returnees does not further the reasonable ends of the community, but,
again, harms the state together with the immediately concerned
individuals.

That it could theoretically be a problem to have "revolving-door"
members, whose activities would impose an unreasonable work-burden on
the censors, is true. This is not a present problem, and this has never
been a problem. To avoid the possibility's arising in the future might
perhaps be prudent, but that could be done through much more modest and
less limiting and punitive provisions. (For example, simply to say that
no person may enter or reenter NR more than once in the period of a
year.)

The automatic supposition that anything that is pleasant and
advantagous to an individual or defends an individual's rights is ipso
facto *at the expense of * the welfare of the community is on the face
of it absurd. We *are* the community! Every citizen who is made more
content and satisfied here is a success for the community which makes it
stronger. And every citizen who is frustrated in a harmless desire and
alienated is a failure for the community. In the needless limitation and
thwarting of others the community is harmed collectively and the harm to
the community collectively in turn harms the other members thereof.

If we have any real concern for that collectivity which is Nova Roma,
then we must strive to accommodate as many individual wishes,
preferences and aspirations as we and the minorities among us may have.
If we collectively wish to outlaw things truely evil or unwholsesome,
then the burden of proof is on us for proving this undesirable character
and the *necessity* of the prohibition. It should not be done simply
because we like to make laws and give orders.

This is serious business. On the Ides of March we witnessed about one
third of the real talent here leave en masse because the constant
atmosphere of disrespect for individuals and the refusal to share enough
power to change that situation disgusted them and reduced them to
despair. Authoritarianism and bureaucracy are social poisons, and those
poisons are far more virulent in an internet-based community where the
disgusted can simply walk off. Virulent, that is, to the community.

If we want Nova Roma to be strong and a good place to be, then we must
not make false dichotomies between the respublica and the citizens. The
slightest inconveniencing of one civis by official intent is something
that needs justification – not to mention telling a citizen what sex his
name has to have or that he cannot hold office if he loves Nova Roma so
much that he wants to return a second time!

A strong and flourishing Nova Roma will only come into being if the
community, by respecting each member and winning his trust and affection
in return, gains his freely-given support. One can love Mater Roma
without feeling an attachment to this particular re-creation. If this
community wishes to gain support and loyalty, it must earn it from each
individual, who will judge it for himself.

Valete!

M. Apollonius Formosanus
Aedilis Plebeius

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Book Title Finalist Poll :o)
From:	"J. T. Sibley" <jrsibley@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 19:44:42 -0400

CW2ShaneEvans@-------- wrote:

> Please look over each of these carefully and send me the number of the title
> which you think would be best for this sort of book. Keep in mind that the
> book is designed to
> help reenactors better their hobby, educate the stupid, and address problems
> we face such as hypocracy, liberal media, and the occasional wacko trying to
> ruin the hobby.

OK, comments on each below:

> 1. Reliving History: Reenacting and Learning from Our Past

Not bad at all!

> 2. "Once and Again: Living History and Military Reenacting"

Not as good as #1. But better than most of the 12 finalists.

> 3. History Alive!--a view of the reenactor's experience

> I like this one a lot! Re-enacting is a lot more than simply battles. Gotta
> have stuff for us wimminfolk, too, as well as for the kids! This title seems
> to cover what you want, and it has "punch". My top pick. [Note that there's a
> gardening supplies company called "Gardens Alive!" which sells eco-friendly
> pest control systems such as nematodes, etc. Folks don't forget the name. I
> don't think there'll be a copyright conflict here.]
>
> 4. Reflections of the Past: Reenacting in America

Also excellent. Tamer title, but more to the point. My #2 pick.

> 5. "Lest We Forget, Reenacting History for the Future"
>
> 6. "Lest We Forget"
> The Military Reenacting/Living History Movement

Both #s 5 and 6 make me think of WWI, WWII military re-enactment to the detriment
of earlier periods and other countries. Not all re-enactment is military. If you
were writing a book *on* military (esp. 20th century military) re-enactment, #6
would be good for that.

> 7. REMEMBERING THE FALLEN : A STUDY OF MILITARY LIVING HISTORY

again, sounds like Memorial Day redux.

> 8. Presenting the Past
> a Handbook to the Reenactment phenomena

Phenomenon. One re-enactment phenomenon, three re-enactment phenomena. Not bad,
if you correct the grammar. Title reminds me of that on the Boy Scout Handbook.

> 9. "The Compendium of Historical Reenactment"

kind of dry; needs a really wild cover illo. Sounds like a dictionary or
encyclopedia, sounds dry.

> 10. " Gone but not Forgotten; Reenacting History Through the Ages"
>
> 11. "World history through American eyes"

naaaaah, too 2nd grade.

> 12. "Old Wars Remembered, Reenacting in America"

Again, the emphasis on military to the exclusion of other facets of re-enactment.

fulvia

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Society and the Individual
From:	"Nick R. Ramos Jr." <nramos@-------->
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2001 23:38:34 -0000

Salve, Formosane!

Since you have made a very cogent and clear presentation of your
views, I hope you will not be offended if I take the liberty to
comment on some of the points you have raised. For the sake of
brevity, I will edit your post somewhat; I will try not to take
anything out of context.

>
> It does not, for example, create any advantage *for the community*
to
> force people to accept names of a gender opposite to that which they
> feel themselves to be and which they use in their social relations.
On
> the contrary, it makes some valuable and sincere people feel
alienated
> from a community and may even keep or drive them and their
contributions
> away. That is a simultaneous *harm* to the community and to the
affected
> individuals. It is thus not a case where a dichotomy of advantage
and
> harm applies between the individual and the collective. Both suffer
> together.
>

On this issue, I think we are closer than at the beginning of the
discussion. However, is the issue truly one of forcing individuals to
assume such names? As I read the edict and proposed lex, it was
requiring a legal name for those issues which involved legal actions.
Chat handles, etc. were not affected; and I will be very frank with
you, I would be a bit careful around an individual who found him or
herself so "tortured" by a name that it would drive them from
participating in an activity they valued. Perhaps I may be wrong with
this, but there are far more pressing and dangerous issues for a
transgendered individual in today's world than the name issue -
including people prejudiced enough to put that individual's very life
in jeopardy. I think the best way we can deal with this issue is let
the People decide - because I still have some faith in our capacity
to
make a good decision on this.

> Likewise, effectively punishing people who leave the community and
wish
> to come back - and doing so in rather arrogant and offensive
language in
> places - is not in the interests of the community. Having people
with
> the interest to come back do so probably will in most cases amount
to
> bringing back people with real interest and a strong emotional and
> personal commitment - probably one considerably greater than those
who
> sign up and remain citizens, but are utterly passive and inactive.
>
> Thus the limitations on these voluntary leavers who become
voluntary
> returnees does not further the reasonable ends of the community,
but,
> again, harms the state together with the immediately concerned
> individuals.
>

I do not agree with you here. We may disagree with one another, we
may even engage in heated debates over issues, but we are still here,
mi Formosane. One of the things that has actually increased my
respect
for you is the fact that you did not leave on the Ides Martius -
because you demonstrated the maturity of character and responsibility
that is sorely needed whenever humans gather to form a collective
effort. If we are to create anything of lasting value here, we must
be able to deal with the frustrations that may arise out of
differences of opinion - that difference is the very essence of human
interaction.

> That it could theoretically be a problem to have "revolving-door"
> members, whose activities would impose an unreasonable work-burden
on
> the censors, is true. This is not a present problem, and this has
never
> been a problem. To avoid the possibility's arising in the future
might
> perhaps be prudent, but that could be done through much more modest
and
> less limiting and punitive provisions. (For example, simply to say
that
> no person may enter or reenter NR more than once in the period of a
> year.)
>

This actually could be worth discussing further - perhaps some
refining in the language of the edict can be effected?

> If we have any real concern for that collectivity which is Nova
Roma,
> then we must strive to accommodate as many individual wishes,
> preferences and aspirations as we and the minorities among us may
have.

This is a very difficult and even dangerous path. Per natura, you
will find that these wishes and preferences have a way of mutating
into even more repressive and prejudicial environs when different
groups jockey for power in a collective. I am personally very much
against authoritarianism, but I trust even less those who attempt to
accomodate everybody - History has shown us how ugly things can get
when such policies are adopted. We certainly can improve our
normative processes - but we need to do so without creating any more
factionalism and strife than what we have seen to date.

> If we collectively wish to outlaw things truely evil or
unwholsesome,
> then the burden of proof is on us for proving this undesirable
character
> and the *necessity* of the prohibition. It should not be done simply
> because we like to make laws and give orders.
>

This I agree wholeheartedly with. Laws should not be created for
their own sake, but as tools for the individual and society to
resolve
issues and conflicts with.

However, the following I disagree with:

> This is serious business. On the Ides of March we witnessed about
one
> third of the real talent here leave en masse because the constant
> atmosphere of disrespect for individuals and the refusal to share
enough
> power to change that situation disgusted them and reduced them to
> despair. Authoritarianism and bureaucracy are social poisons, and
those
> poisons are far more virulent in an internet-based community where
the
> disgusted can simply walk off. Virulent, that is, to the community.
>

The events of the Ides Martius showed us that people will be as
emotional as ever when they do not get their way. The atmosphere of
disrespect which you mention was as much produced by those
individuals as by those who opposed them. Unfortunately, a fact of
life is that it is always far easier to engage in ad hominem attacks
than to argue with reason on issues. Both sides in the discussions
that led up to the Ides Martius are equally guilty of that - some
apologies have been proferred in that respect, and perhaps we will
learn to elevate our discussions above such conduct in the future. I
agree a lot of talent walked off, but I think that they did so more
out of an attempt to "punish" their opponents by making a dramatic
exit. This attempt failed - and with good reason. It simply was not
the way to convince anyone that they really loved what we are
attempting to do here. In fact, it expressed a total lack of respect
for the rest of us who were willing to listen to them and actually
valued their opinions! A sad event indeed, for not much Dignitas was
demonstrated by those who left, and by many who remained.

>
> A strong and flourishing Nova Roma will only come into being if the
> community, by respecting each member and winning his trust and
affection
> in return, gains his freely-given support. One can love Mater Roma
> without feeling an attachment to this particular re-creation. If
this
> community wishes to gain support and loyalty, it must earn it from
each
> individual, who will judge it for himself.

It is true that one can love Mater Roma without feeling an attachment
to this particular recreation - but then, why even become a citizen
of it? When I joined, it was BECAUSE I felt a sense of belonging here,
an attachment to the goals and aspirations of this particular
recreation.

Truth be told, there are things I do not agree with - but it is my
responsibility to express myself on those issues and seek a
betterment of those conditions. I will postulate, mi Formosane, that
the Nova Roman community at large does respect individuals; it is
specific individuals and their idiosyncrasies that have produced many
of the acerbic and heated discussions observed here. I also think
that
most of our fellow citizens here also understand this - in fact,
quite
a few have joined us during this period. It may be a morbid desire to
see virtual fists flying, but I honestly think it has more to do with
seeing a place that, despite it's flaws, aspires to be the physical
and spiritual heir of that Lux Diva that was Rome....

Again amici mei, thank you for helping us reason through this Contio.
Your passion and conviction is admirable, and although we may not
always agree, I think there is far more here that unites us than what
sunders us. Never let it be said that the Appollonii are
uninteresting
or inconsequential people! May the Gods watch over you and yours, and
allow us the occassion to further learn from each other.

Marius Cornelius Scipio
Aedilis Curulis

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/