Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Gladiatorial combats and races on the NR chat room.
From:	Andrea Gladia Kyrinia <andrea_gladia@-------->
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 17:07:33 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete!

--- QFabiusMax@-------- wrote:
> << Actually, I wondered what became of you--I haven't heard from you
> about
> the arena since last summer. I've been through two other jobs since
> and have a MUCH more stable life now, and would be curious to know
> what became of the project. I had assumed that it was cancelled, or
> postponed until further notice. >>
> Andrea Gladia Kyrinia Salve!
> Well, I'm glad to hear from you, and happy your situation has
> stabilized,
> when I talked to you last, things were very much up in the air. If
> you would
> like to resume work on our harena, I would be honored to work with
> you.

Well, I better fill you in on the last several months, then... I was a
dot-com escapee, then a dot-com layoff, and now I've left dot-coms
entirely. I work for a nice, stable, and growing software company that
is hiring like mad in a climate that is laying off employees or
maintaining.

As for helping out, yes indeed I am available. Let me know what your
plans are and contact me at your earliest convenience when you have the
chance.

Valete,

=====
Andrea Gladia Kyrinia
Apollinis Templi Sacerdos
Materfamilias of Gladia
*******************************************
Yahoo: kyreneariadne / andrea_gladia / andrea_m_berman
AIM: Kyrene Ariadne / la Amberman ICQ: 6663573
http://TempleApollo.faithweb.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Excellent news
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 17:25:29 -0700

Ave,

This is excellent news for me at least. For a long time techs at Earthlink
were technically unable to chat on AIM during work. However, that has
changed. Earthlink has now officially allowed its techs to chat on AIM now.
:)

So if anyone wants to chat with me, my AIM handle is Nova Roman.

Happy chatting,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 20:13:49 -0500

Salvete Luci Corneli et alii

Since you've decided to cease talking about this, I'll forego any more
debate about the linguistic/semantic side of our conversation and make
just one point regarding the political side.

> However, the issue then becomes devisve when we have to deal with
> the subtle meaning as protrayed by the leftists of Nova Roma.

It also becomes divisive when we have to deal with the subtle meanings
used by the rightists of Nova Roma.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
"Ipsa scientia potestas est."
-Francis Bacon

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


Subject:	[novaroma] For the record...
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 01:16:10 -0000

For the record, the "poll" was *not* mine. I have my own
suspiscion as to the prankster, but to accuse without more than
circumstantial evidence is rather, uh, Draconian, shall we say?

Nerva

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Polybios comments on the Republic (long)
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 22:02:30 EDT

Salvete.
Part of the problem we moderns here in Nova Roma have with the Roman republic
is what
configuration is it in, by our estimation. I want you to read Polybios
explanation of the Roman constitution to his fellow Greeks. But first here
is his discourse on the natural progression of the state. Remember this how
the ancients viewed the different concepts of
government, written 140 years before Christianity. And now here is Polybios!

Charie People of Rome! I have been asked by Q. Fabius Maximus, one my
Patron's greatest heros, to explain a little about my view of your state. I
find your state a puzzle and a wonderful achievment. However your state is
far from unique as you will see.
If you will let me unroll this scroll here. Ah yes. We begain.
Ahem! BOOK VI. Sect II. ON THE FORMS OF STATES

3. In the case of those Greek states which have often risen to greatness and
have often experienced a complete change of fortune, it is an easy matter
both to describe their past and to pronounce as to their future. For there is
no difficulty in reporting the known facts, and it is not hard to foretell
the future by inference from the past. But about the Roman state it is
neither at all easy to explain the present situation owing to the complicated
character of the constitution, nor to foretell the future owing to our
ignorance of the peculiar features of public and private life at Rome in the
past. Particular attention and study are therefore required if one wishes to
attain a clear general view of the distinctive qualities of the Roman
constitution.
Most of those whose object it has been to instruct us methodically concerning
such matters, distinguish three kinds of constitutions, which they call
kingship, aristocracy, and democracy. Now we should, I think, be quite
justified in asking them to enlighten us as to whether they represent these
three to be the sole varieties or rather to be the best; for in either case ,
my opinion is that they are wrong. For it is evident that we must regard as
the best constitution a combination of all these three varieties, since we
have had proof of this not only theoretically but by actual experience,
Lykurgus having been the first to draw up a constitution - that of Sparta- on
this principle. Nor on the other hand can we admit that these are the only
three varieties; for we have witnessed monarchical and tyrannical
governments, which while they differ very widely from kingship, yet bear a
certain resemblance to it, this being the reason why monarchs in general
falsely assume and use, as far as they can, the regal title. There have also
been several oligarchical constitutions which seem to bear some likeness to
aristocratic ones, though the divergence is, generally, as wide as possible.
The same holds good about democracies.

4. The truth of what I say is evident from the following considerations. It
is by no means every monarchy which we can call straight off a kingship, but
only that which is voluntarily accepted by the subjects and where they are
governed rather by an appeal to their reason than by fear and force. Nor
again can we style every oligarchy an aristocracy, but only that where the
government is in the hands of a selected body of just and wise men. Similarly
that is no true democracy in which the whole crowd of citizens is free to do
whatever they wish or purpose, but when, in a community where it is
traditional and customary to reverence the gods, to honor our parents, to
respect our elders, and to obey the laws, the will of the greater number
prevails, this is to be called a democracy.
We should therefore assert that there are six kinds of governments, the three
above mentioned which are in everyone's mouth and the three which are
naturally allied to them, I mean to say monarchy, oligarchy and mob-rule.
Now the first of these to come into being is the monarchy, its growth being
natural and unaided; and from it next arises kingship derived from monarchy
by the aid of art and by the correction of its defects.
Monarchy first changes into its vicious allied form: tyranny; and next, the
abolishment of both gives birth to aristocracy. Aristocracy by its very
nature degenerates into oligarchy; and when the commons inflamed by anger
take vengeance on this government for its unjust rule, democracy comes into
being; and in due course the licence and lawlessness of this form of
government produces mob-rule to complete the progression.
The truth of what I have just said will be quite clear to anyone who pays due
attention to such beginnings, and changes are in each case natural. For he
alone who has seen how each form naturally arises and develops, will be able
to see when, how, and where the growth, perfection, change, and of each are
likely to occur again. And it is to the Roman constitution above all that
this method, I think, may be successfully applied, since from the outset its
formation and growth have been due to natural causes.

5. Perhaps this theory of the natural transformations into each other of the
different forms of
government is more elaborately set forth by Plato and certain other
philosophers; but as the arguments are subtle and are stated at great length,
they are beyond the understanding of all but a few. I therefore will attempt
to give a short summary of the theory, as far as I consider it to apply to
the actual history of facts and to appeal to the common intelligence of
mankind.
For if there appear to be certain omissions in my general exposition of it,
the detailed discussion which follows will afford the listener ample
compensation for any difficulties now left unsolved.
What then are the beginnings I speak of and what is the first origin of
political societies? When owing to floods, famines, failure of crops or other
such causes there occurs such a destruction of the human race as tradition
tells us has more than once happened, and as we must believe will often
happen again, all arts and crafts perishing at the same time, then in the
course of time, when springing from the survivors as from seeds men have
again increased in numbers and just like other animals form herds-it being a
matter of course that they too should herd together with those of their kind
owing to their natural weakness, it is a necessary consequence that the man
who excels in bodily strength and in courage will lead and rule over the
rest. We observe and should regard as a most genuine work of nature this very
phenomenon in the case of the other animals which act purely by instinct and
among whom the strongest are always indisputably the masters - I speak of
bulls, boars, cocks, and the like. It is probable then that at the beginning
men lived thus, herding together like animals and following the lead of the
strongest and bravest, the ruler's strength being here the sole limit to his
power and the name we should give his rule being monarchy.
But when in time feelings of sociability and companionship begin to grow in
such gatherings of men, then kingship has struck root; and the notions of
goodness, j justice, and their opposites begin to arise in men.

6. The manner in which these ideas come into being is as follows. Men being
all naturally inclined to sexual intercourse, and the consequence of this
being the birth of children, whenever one of those who have been reared does
not on growing up show gratitude to those who reared him or defend them, but
on the contrary takes to speaking ill of them or ill treating them, it is
evident that he will displease and offend those who have been familiar with
his parents and have witnessed the care and pains they spent on attending to
and feeding their children. For seeing that men are distinguished from the
other animals by possessing the faculty of reason, it is obviously improbable
that such a difference of conduct should escape them, as it escapes the other
animals: they will notice the thing and be displeased at what is going on,
looking to the future and reflecting that they may all meet with the same
treatment. Again when a man who has been helped or aided when in danger by
another does not show gratitude to his preserver, but even goes as far as of
attempting him an injury, it is clear that those who become aware of it will
naturally be displeased and offended by such conduct, sharing the resentment
of their injured neighbor and imagining themselves to be in the same
situation. From all this there arises in everyone a idea of the meaning and
theory of duty, which is the beginning and the end of justice. Similarly,
when any man is foremost in defending his fellows from danger, and braves and
awaits the onslaught of the most powerful beasts, it is natural that he
should receive 'marks of favor and honor from the people, while the man who
acts in the opposite manner will meet with dishonor and dislike. From this
again some idea of what is base and what is noble and of what constitutes the
difference is likely to arise among the people; and noble conduct will be
admired and imitated because it is advantageous, while base conduct will be
avoided.
Now when the leading and most powerful man among the people always throws the
weight of his authority on the side of the ideal of such matters he generally
prevails, and when in the opinion of his subjects he divides rewards and
penalties according to their deserts, they yield obedience to him no longer
because they fear his force, but rather because their judgement approves him;
and they join in maintaining his rule even if he is quite enfeebled by age,
defending him with one consent and battling against those who conspire to
overthrow his rule. Thus by insensible degrees the monarch becomes a king,
ferocity and force having yielded the supremacy to reason.

7. Thus is formed naturally among men the first notion of goodness and
justice, and their opposites; this is the beginning and birth of true
kingship. For the people maintain the supreme power not only in the hands of
these men themselves, but in those of their descendants, from the conviction
that those born from and reared by such men will also have principles the
same as theirs. And if they ever are displeased with the descendants, they
now choose their kings and rulers no longer for their bodily strength and
brute courage, but for the excellence of their judgement and reasoning
powers, as they have gained experience from actual facts of the difference
between the one class of qualities and the other. In old times, then, those
who had once been chosen to the royal office continued to hold it until they
grew old, fortifying and enclosing fine strongholds with walls and acquiring
lands, in the one case for the sake of the security of their subjects and in
the other to provide them with abundance of the necessities of life. And
while pursuing these aims, they were exempt from all vituperation or
jealousy, as neither in their dress nor in their food and drink did they make
any great distinction, but lived very much like everyone else, not keeping
apart from the people. But when they received the office by hereditary
succession and found then' safety now provided for, and more than sufficient
provision of food, they gave way to their appetites owing to this
superabundance, and came to think that the rulers must be distinguished from
their subjects by a peculiar dress, that there should be a peculiar luxury
and variety in the dressing and serving of their viands, and that they should
meet with no denial in the pursuit of their amours, however lawless.
These habits having given rise in the one case to envy and offence and in the
other to an outburst of hatred and passionate resentment, the kingship
changed into a tyranny; the first steps towards its overthrow were taken by
the subjects, and conspiracies began to be formed. These conspiracies were
not the work of the worst men, but of the noblest, most high-spirited, and
most courageous, because such men are least able to brook the insolence of
princes.

8. The people now having got leaders, would combine with them against the
ruling powers for the reasons I stated above; kingship and monarchy would be
utterly abolished, and in their place aristocracy would begin to grow. For
the commons, as if bound to pay at once their debt of gratitude to the
abolishes of monarchy, would make them their leaders and entrust their
destinies to them.
At first these chiefs gladly assumed this charge and regarded nothing as of
greater importance than the common interest, administering the private and
public affairs of the people with paternal solicitude. But here again when
children inherited this position of authority from their fathers, having no
experience of misfortune and none at all of civil equality and liberty of
speech, and having been brought up from the cradle amid the evidences of the
power and high position of their fathers, they abandoned themselves some to
greed of gain and unscrupulous moneymaking, others to indulgence in wine and
the convivial excess which accompanies it, and others again to the violation
of women and the rape of boys; and thus converting the aristocracy into an
oligarchy aroused in the people feelings similar to those of which I just
spoke, in consequence met with the same destrous end as the tyrant.

9. For whenever anyone who has noticed the jealousy and hatred with they they
are regarded by the citizens, has the courage to speak or act against the
chiefs of the state, he has the whole mass of the people ready to back.
Next, when the people have either killed or banned the oligarchs, they no
longer venture to set a king over them, as they still remember with terror
the injustice they suffered from the former ones, ,nor can they entrust the
government with confidence; to a select few, with the evidence before them of
their recent error in doing so. Thus the only hope still surving unimpaired
is in themselves, and it is to this they resort, making the state a democracy
instead an oligarchy and the whole people assuming the responsibility for the
conduct of affairs. Then as long as some of those survive who experienced the
evils of oligarchical dominion, they are well pleased with the present form
government, and set a high value on equality and
freedom of speech. But when a new generation comes into power and the
democracy falls into the hands of the grandchildren of its founders, they
have become so accustomed to freedom and equality that they no longer value
them, and begin to aim at pre-eminence; and it is chiefly those of ample
fortune who fall into this error. So when they begin to lust for power and
cannot attain it through themselves or their own good qualities, they ruin
their estates, tempting and corrupting the people in every possible way. And
hence when by their foolish thirst for reputation they have created among the
masses an appetite for gifts and the habit of receiving them, democracy in
its turn is abolished and changes into a rule of force and violence. For the
people, having grown accustomed feed at the expense of others and to depend
for their livelihood on the property of others, as soon as they find a leader
who is enterprising but is excluded from the honors of office by his penury,
institute the rule of violence; and now uniting their forces massacre,
banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again to perfect savages and find
once more a master and monarch.
Such is the cycle of political revolution, the course pointed by nature in
which constitutions change, disappear, and finally return to the point from
which they started. Anyone who clearly perceives is may indeed in speaking of
the future of any state be wrong in his estimate of the time the process will
take, but if his judgement is not tainted by animosity or jealousy, he will
very seldom be mistaken to the stage of growth or decline it has reached, and
as to the form into which it will change. And specially in the case of the
Roman state will this method enable us to arrive at a knowledge of its
formation, growth, and greatest perfection, and likewise of the change for
the worse which is sure follow some day. For, as I said, this state, more
than any other, has been formed and has grown naturally, and will undergo a
natural decline and change to its contrary.
We will take a short break then I'll will read about the Roman constitution.
Rejoice!
Citizens...
The amazing thing about this piece, is that while Polybios wrote this in the
140s before the Grachii before Gauis Marius, before L Cornelius Sulla and
finally Iulius Caesar, he predicts their appearance and the result they will
have on the republic with uncanny accuracy.More Polybios soon.
Valete!

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Vote Results from the Comitia Populi
From:	octavianuslucius@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 02:15:43 -0000

Salve Quaestor electus Oppi Flacce Severe.
Congratulations!!!!. Tibi maxime congratulor!!!
I wish you the best of luck in your new office!!!
Vale bene
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus

--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@n...>
wrote:
> In the election for the position of quaestor, 24 tribes voted for
Oppius
> Flaccus Severus and 11 voted for Titus Curius Dannicus. Oppius
Flaccus
> Severus wins the position.
>

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Troll Posts
From:	Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 11:58:35 +1000

Ave Drusus

Thank you for this - it is something all of us need to be reminded of now
and again.

Vale

Marcus Sentius Claudius

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucius Sicinius Drusus [mailto:lsicinius@--------]
Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2001 2:25 Am
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Troll Posts

>>I would sugest that SOME of you need to read this.

http://www.novaroma.org/via_romana/virtues.html

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus >>>>

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

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the Network Administrator on +61 3 9667 6699.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been scanned
for the presence of computer viruses and inappropriate content.
**********************************************************************

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)
From:	"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 03:33:49 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
> Salvete omnes; et salve, Gaii Popili.
>
> --- ksterne@-------- wrote:
>
> <<snipped>>
>
> > Salve Gnae Sali,
> >
> > I'm no expert, but I believe Roman juries were composed of groups of
> > Equites and Senators chosen by lot. I don't think entire assembelies
> >
> > ever served as juries. I suspect Quintus Fabius Maximus knows the
> > hard historical facts.
>
> Not as juries; but as every citizen had the right of apellatio, I guess
> they could decide on some judicial matters. I would also like to know
> the opinion of Q. Fabius Max. on this issue.
>
> >
> > As for Nova Roma, I support the use of the Assemblies as juries.
> > Although not historical we are too small in number to ask the Senate
> > to handle this as well. The juries of Roma Antiqua were quite large
> > (approx. 100) if I recall correctly. Any matter grave enough to
> > require a jury trial here in NR, should be left to the whole people.
>
> I guess that the disadvantages of handling judicial procedures through
> the Comitia were very well pointed out by L. Sicinius Drusus on a
> previous post. To honour my previous statement about the importance of
> Roman tradition, I would suggest to actually make juries of 100 cives
> (as they wouldn't be an Assembly, they could work OUTSIDE the Dies
> Comitiales, although not on Dies Nefasti). To update this tradition to
> modern standards, I would propose that those 100 were not drawn from
> the Senatorial and Equites Orders, but from all cives in good standing;
> and that they were not "appointed" by the Senate, but chosen randomly
> (as this was a tradition common to Classical Culture, especially
> Athenian).
>

Salvete,

There was no fixed size to Roman juries. The more serious the charge,
the larger the jury, for example a charge of Murder would entail a
larger jury than a charge of Extortion. Also Since the verdict was by
majority vote the number of jurors was allways an odd number to lessen
the chance of a tied vote. Since it was possible for a juror to turn
in a mismarked ballot rather than voting Absolvo or damno, if a tie
did occur, the verdict was considered for aquital.

Many of the details of how a Roman jury was composed depend on what
year you wish to pick. The Roman jury system was in constant flux
during the late Republic. I Consider Sulla's reforms of the system to
be a major event that we would do good to emulate (save his return to
all Senatorial Juries). Most of Sulla's laws were short lived, but his
court system was refined, not abolished.

Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Where is our Vestal?
From:	MffnQueen@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 02:54:10 -0000

Salvete omnes! I'm rather new to the list (my first post, actually),
and I have to say, I've been following the Nova Roma for years and I
am *SO* excited to finally be a part. I look forward to getting to
know all of you! Now.. I'm a new citizen of Nova Roma, member of the
gens Cassia, and servant of Vesta. As such, I am in rather urgent
need of Prima Lucilla Cornelia Fortuna. If anyone knows where I can
reach her (if she wants to be reached, that is), please contact me as
soon as possible. If she is for some reason not accepting e-mail, I
would much appreciate it if you could let her know I wish to speak
with her. Multas gratias tibi for your time!

Pax Vobiscum,
Julia Cassia Aurora

--- In novaroma@--------, gcassiusnerva@c... wrote:
> Does anyone know where our new Vestal, Lucilla Cornelia Prima is?
> I tried emailing her twice and both times the mail was returned as
> undeliverable.

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Where is our Vestal?
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 20:42:33 -0700

on 5/23/01 7:54 PM, MffnQueen@-------- at MffnQueen@-------- wrote:

> Salvete omnes! I'm rather new to the list (my first post, actually),
> and I have to say, I've been following the Nova Roma for years and I
> am *SO* excited to finally be a part. I look forward to getting to
> know all of you! Now.. I'm a new citizen of Nova Roma, member of the
> gens Cassia, and servant of Vesta. As such, I am in rather urgent
> need of Prima Lucilla Cornelia Fortuna. If anyone knows where I can
> reach her (if she wants to be reached, that is), please contact me as
> soon as possible. If she is for some reason not accepting e-mail, I
> would much appreciate it if you could let her know I wish to speak
> with her. Multas gratias tibi for your time!

Ave,

I am in regular contact with our Vesta Maxima....I will check with her to
release her phone number to you...Julia. The problem is that she is
recovering from surgery and as she stated to me this round of surgeries were
extremely painful and the rehabilitation period is taking much longer than
predicted. Please email me off list and I will try to get you in touch with
her.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

> Pax Vobiscum,
> Julia Cassia Aurora
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, gcassiusnerva@c... wrote:
>> Does anyone know where our new Vestal, Lucilla Cornelia Prima is?
>> I tried emailing her twice and both times the mail was returned as
>> undeliverable.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Juries
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 00:00:08 EDT

In a message dated 5/23/2001 12:08:16 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
salixastur@-------- writes:

<>
Well having been asked so nicely....
The first judicial body in the Republic was the Senate. Figures right? Here
are the most learned men in the state, richest also, determining the fate of
some poor dirt farmer.
If the dirt farmer was condemned to die he could appeal that sentence to the
Comitia Curiae.
Make no mistake about the government at this time, it was a not a
representative Republic whose offices filled by popular election by the
tribal districts of Rome. That came later.
Since the Roman government was a military one, the levy (legio) of the Greek
style phalanx was determined in centuries (100 men). This caused the rise of
the Comitia Centuriata. All land holding citizens of Rome were divided into
classes (five) The richest class 1 with the aristocratic cavalry controlled
the voting of the Magistrates. While this seems unfair, remember these were
expected to supply their armor and weapons to fight for Rome, and were the
first called upon in a military emergency.
As the Roman population grew, the centuries grew with them. And as the
magistracies grew in power soon those ungrateful Plebeians wanted a say in
the way they ran their government.
In either 471 or 476 the tribunate was formed followed by the grouping of all
plebes into 4 tribes each administrated by a tribune. This is the start of
the assembly of the tribes.
Democracy was finally starting to make in roads into Rome.
The law process was still primitive. Either it was carried out via a
formulae where an arbitrator (Iudex) made a decision based on the formulae.
Appeal would be to the Senate or the Comitia Curiae. Assessors drawn from
Senate continued to judge crimes by magistrates involving extortion and
corruption. The Centuries would be assembled to act as assessors hear and
vote on the death of citizen who had committed treachery, or blasphemed.
Naturally the Plebes were getting the short end of the stick here. Since the
law was not codified, rather more an oral tradition, with Paterfamilias as
dictators, Plebes were at a major disadvantage since they didn't know it
well. And if you were a plebe in front of the Centurate, forgetaboutit! You
were being judged by your betters not your peers. Granted you had the right
to appeal, but it would probably not be overturned. Death or banishment
awaited.
The next big victory for the people was in 444 (451) when a commission of ten
magistrates
called decemvirs was to take one year and codify the law. The commission had
several plebes on it, while was not really that big a deal, it was huge in
the eyes of the plebes.
The result of this codification of annalistic tradition which came to be
called the tables of XII. Rome had laws! Patrician as well a Plebian now
knew what punishment would be levied for what crime. More important in my
thinking was the table of 12 guaranteed the right of appeal of ANY citizen
condemned to death or banishment or fined by any magistrate.
Said appeal would still be handled by the Comitia Centuriaie but now
Plebeians were included in their ranks.
The tribes which had grown more powerful. By 287 BC it had reached 35 and
what was more important, became the body to pass all magisterial legislation,
approved by the senate or not. And most important they would handle the
appeals of those fined by Iudex who exceeded his authority. True democracy
had come to Rome.
This would continue until C. Graechus revamped the Quaestio on extortion and
gave the juries to the Equestrian order. This neatly cut the senate out of
the jury loop, and here after the provincial Praetors and the knights would
make deals to bleed their provinces, with little or no punishment.
Sulla eliminated this after seizing power in the 80s. He took controls away
from the knights and restored it to the Senate, senators would serve on
Quaestio involved in Treason and extortion. The knights were confined to
bankruptcy only. By this time the Tribes were no longer involved in deciding
appeals, but we were not sure when that happened.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Where is our Vestal?
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 04:09:13 -0000

Salve Iulia,

Do you prefer to be called Aurora or Iulia or Iulia Aurora?

Welcome to the best gens in Nova Roma! Look for some email from me
soon.

Nerva

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Polybios Comments on the Republic
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 00:22:03 -0400

Salve Quinti Fabi: Many thanks for bringing the Comments of Polybios to us. I found it to be very instructive and intend to go find a book that has his writings. I hope everyone takes the time and opportunity to read your post. Here was a man who had vision, and wisdom. Gratias tibi ago et ave atque vale, ... Appius Tullius Marcellus 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] Men and Boys
From:	"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 04:51:58 -0000

Salvete Quirites,

Of late i've seen a lot of citizens using demeaning terms towards each
other, and I'd like to address ONE of these terms.

Despite the fact that Draco has made it well known that he resents
being refered to as a "kid" or a "boy" or some other age related term,
some of you insist on throwing his age in his face.

If your postion is so weak that the only way you can defend it is to
attack other people rather than sticking to the ideas they are
discussing, then there must not be much substance to your ideas.

By Roman law Draco is a man. At 17 he would have been subject to the
levies if Roma was raising a legio. He could have voted, and if the
occasion arose served as a Paterfamilis. Those of you who claim to
respect the customs of Roma should stop ignoring this fact.

>From one of his posts I learned that Draco is about to turn 18, and
will legaly be a man according to the laws of most Macro Nations. I'm
not familar with the laws of his Macro Nation, but I do know that if
he lived in mine he would be able to vote and be subject to the
military draft (If the Need arose), and I assume that Belgium's laws
are similar regarding voting and military service.

Can the BS about his age. Draco is a man, and entitled to the same
respect as any other man.

IMHO most of the references to Draco's age were made with the intent
to demean him, and attack his ideas by demeaning him. As far as I'm
concerned there is NO difference in using these terms that he has
repeatidly stated that he finds demeaning and using other terms that
are intended to degrade someone. There is no difference in calling
Draco a "Boy", and calling a Citizen of African heiratage a "Nigger"
or calling a gay citizen a "Queer" They are all attempts to degrade
another human being.

Nor am I intrested in hearing any protests about members of Draco's
family, faction, or even him using terms that others don't like.
Didn't your Momma teach you that two wrongs don't make a right?

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Ostracism
From:	coriolanus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 06:02:02 -0000

> > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
> > novaroma group:
> >
> > Woah!Germy wants Formy to quit! Should
> > Formosanus leave Nova Roma?
> >
> > o leave
> > o stay

Quirites

Ostracism practics like this are injuring dignitas of Nova Roma.

No matter who is author of this poll (maybe someone from Sulla's
neighbourhood maybe someone else). But there are other more Roman
ways to end war between Apollonians and Cornelians. If you can not
find it do not deserve to call Cives Romanus.

Vale!

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Ostracism
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 23:04:55 -0700

on 5/23/01 11:02 PM, coriolanus@-------- at coriolanus@-------- wrote:

>>> Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
>>> novaroma group:
>>>
>>> Woah!Germy wants Formy to quit! Should
>>> Formosanus leave Nova Roma?
>>>
>>> o leave
>>> o stay
>
>
> Quirites
>
> Ostracism practics like this are injuring dignitas of Nova Roma.
>
> No matter who is author of this poll (maybe someone from Sulla's
> neighbourhood maybe someone else). But there are other more Roman
> ways to end war between Apollonians and Cornelians. If you can not
> find it do not deserve to call Cives Romanus.

Ave,

Let me state to you, Gaius Marcius that your dignitas suffers just as much
when you make interpretations such as the one you posted just there.
Remember that and your dignitas before you make such posts.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Men and Boys
From:	coriolanus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 06:18:53 -0000

Quirites,

I must agree with Drusus. Draco is adult according Roman Law so if
you are attacking him for his age you must be really in the corner.

It is the same thing as Sulla did when made jokes from Petrus
Longinus low English skills. But if censor who should be protector
and defender of Roman Virtus make it, it could make it anyone.

And if you are thinking that to be older means to be wiser you are
wrong. See some posts in this list.

Vale!
Gaius Marcius Coriolanus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Ostracism
From:	coriolanus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 06:25:23 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@e...>
wrote:
> on 5/23/01 11:02 PM, --------olanus@-------- at --------olanus@-------- wrote:
>
> >>> Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
> >>> novaroma group:
> >>>
> >>> Woah!Germy wants Formy to quit! Should
> >>> Formosanus leave Nova Roma?
> >>>
> >>> o leave
> >>> o stay
> >
> >
> > Quirites
> >
> > Ostracism practics like this are injuring dignitas of Nova Roma.
> >
> > No matter who is author of this poll (maybe someone from Sulla's
> > neighbourhood maybe someone else). But there are other more Roman
> > ways to end war between Apollonians and Cornelians. If you can not
> > find it do not deserve to call Cives Romanus.
>
> Ave,
>
> Let me state to you, Gaius Marcius that your dignitas suffers just
as much
> when you make interpretations such as the one you posted just there.
> Remember that and your dignitas before you make such posts.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Ave

Let me ask you to explain what is wrong in my interpretation of this
poll? It is ostracism. It has no precedens in whole republican.
history.

Someone said that senate has got enough power to expel Formosanus out
of NR, and I think that censores have got the power too. But I hope
they never do it.

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Ostracism
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2001 23:53:50 -0700

<SNIP>

> > Ave,
> >
> > Let me state to you, Gaius Marcius that your dignitas suffers just
> as much
> > when you make interpretations such as the one you posted just there.
> > Remember that and your dignitas before you make such posts.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> Ave
>
> Let me ask you to explain what is wrong in my interpretation of this
> poll?

What was wrong was your assumption Gaius Marcius. You accused without
having any facts. Your assumption, in my mind places you in the exact
same category of Sextus Apollonius when he accused me of approving the
application of Gaius Cassius Nerva. That is what is wrong with you and
your post.

It is ostracism. It has no precedens in whole republican.
> history.

That isnt the point I was making Gaius Marcius. Nor is it the point I
am making now. I called you on your ASSUMPTION. You are wrong, just
like Sextus Apollonius was wrong.

> Someone said that senate has got enough power to expel Formosanus out
> of NR, and I think that censores have got the power too. But I hope
> they never do it.

According to the Constitution every citizen has the right to appeal to
the People under II.B.5. Let me quote it for you right here: "The
right of provocatio; to appeal a decision of a magistrate that has a
direct negative impact upon that citizen to the comitia populi
tributa." So, if anyone is going to get expelled he/she has a right to
appeal. Therefore the People will have a final say on expulsion.
Please read the Constitution before you share any other inaccurate
information.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

> Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
>
>
>
> 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:	Re: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop bashing governments)
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jerry=20Anguston?= <gaiussentius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 17:13:40 +1000 (EST)

Avete omnes and Oppius Flaccus,

It's amazing, isn't it? You'd think that Communism and
Fascism were so different, wouldn't you?
Well....NEWSFLASH people, they are different! By
definition, Stalin and the USSR's Communism would be a
Fascist state! If you are going to bash Communism in
the style labelled below in your address to Draco,
please have the foreknowledge about the true tennats
of Communism, and quit referring to Stalinism as
Communism. The label is just a convenient name. I
suggest you read Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.

I am not a communist, as I see it as a system that
cannot possibly work. Saying it would work is like
saying that the Athenian type of pure-bred democracy
would be feasible in today's world. But it's a nice
thought, isn't it? A utopian society where everyone is
equal, no-one better than anyone else. The sad thing
is, it is the petty and the greedy who refer to
Communism as evil (I do not mean to insult you
personally mi Oppi, it's just a generalisation). Why
do I say this, you ask? Because, of course, it would
mean that the rich would have to give up their wealth
to help their poorer brethren....and we can't have
that happen, now can we?;-) Why do you think America
has come to fear Communism so much (apart from the
obvious Stalinistic traits)? It is because it is a
threat to the rich classes of the US. Let me put it
this way....many of the top 10 richest people on Earth
are Americans (I'd like it to be known that I have
nothing against Americans, I'm just making a point),
and their combined wealth equals somewhere around the
upper billions to the trillions. And may the gods
forbid anyone else should have that money, such as the
poor. The fear of communism is brought about by the
corporations who dominate the western world, and after
all, money is power, and for the most part everyone
has their price.

Anyway, those are just my two cents on this part of
the topic. For those of you who have an extremely
heartfelt hatred of the "TRUE" form of Communism and
its "EXISTENCE", maybe it's time to tell you that the
Tooth Fariy doesn't exist, Santa Claus is just your
parents bringing you presents and so is the Easter
Bunny!:-))

Sorry to bring this up and bore you, I just felt it
needed to be aired for academic reasons, from one
person who has spent a lot of time studying government
forms throughout history.

Valete bene omnes,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

--- "S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
wrote:
<HR>
<html><body>
<tt>
Salvete Quirites, 
 
Over the past 24 hours, I have witnessed things here
on this list beyond 
belief. Allow me to reply to some people (I'll try to
be as short and to the 
point as possible). 
 
 
Gaius Cassius Nerva scripsit: 
----------------------------------- 
 
> Use of the word "kid" to designate
those in Draco's age range is 
> common and is not considered at all to be
derogatory. 
> 
> However, I apologise if I hurt the boy's
feelings. 
 
It's not common to designate my age range by the use
of the word "kid" (at 
least not over here). And neither am I a
"boy", old man. 
 
> Enter your vote today! A new poll has been
created for the 
> novaroma group: 
> 
> Woah!Germy wants Formy to quit! Should 
> Formosanus leave Nova Roma? 
> 
> o leave 
> o stay 
> 
 
The only person whoever used the term
"Formy" in public was Sulla, so I 
suspect the creator of this poll was one of the people
of his circle. And 
since it was appearently a troll, and the only person
who came in trolling 
here so far was Festus/Nerva, I suspect even stronger
it was him. In any 
case, this is a sad and childish attempt at humour. I
think the Curatrix 
Sermonis acted correctly here -- you won't hear me
complain. 
 
 
 
Flavius Vedius Germanicus scripsit: 
------------------------------------------ 
 
(snipped) 
 
> Otherwise, your rash accusations about
conspiracies among the "Oligarchy" 
> and your demands for punishment of apparent
innocent error, are obviously 
> merely yet another attempt on your part to foment
dissent and disruption 
> within our Republic. You have publically (if
mistakenly) admitted that you 
> despise Nova Roma, and you have privately told me
that you intend to 
resign 
> eventually anyway. One can only think the only
reason you have not yet 
done 
> so is to be able to throw yet more
monkey-wrenches into the works before 
you 
> finally do bless us with your back. 
> 
 
Innocent error? This is nowhere near proven. Nor is
the contrary, but I 
would like to point out here that you seem to be as
prejudiced as 
Formosanus. 
 
> I have had enough of your lies and
misrepresentations, I have had enough 
of 
> your transparent attempts to disrupt the growth
and prosperity of Nova 
Roma, 
> I have had enough of your self-righteous
indignation, and I have had 
enough 
> of you. 
> 
> I hereby call upon you, Marcus Apollonius
Formosanus, to resign your 
> Citizenship and offices, and never darken our
door again. You are 
obviously 
> miserable here (other than whatever glee you
derive from causing grief for 
> well-meaning men and disorder for our Republic as
a whole). Your idea of 
> what Nova Roma should be is so far from what the
vast majority of Cives 
> think as to be laughable, and yet your insistance
that the rest follow 
your 
> vision becomes shriller and more tedious with
every passing day. What 
> positive contributions you do make are few and
far between, and are 
> completely overwhelmed by your main passtime;
tearing down and complaining 
> about the work of others, and assaulting their
character and persons. 
> 
 
If that is not a personal attack, I wonder what it is.
What "demands" 
Formosanus ever made were unreasonable? There were
some, probably, but 
certainly not all. I'd also be careful in assessing
that everyone follows 
your view and not his. All three leges have passed,
but there was a rather 
significant minority that voted against them. The fair
way to follow after a 
complaint would to research it, not to complain about
the complainer. And if 
that person keeps complaining, he or she is either
simply a natural born 
complainer, or the people he or she is complaining to
simply won't listen. 
You prefer to think of the former possibility. I do
not. 
 
> In short, you and we will both be happier once
you are gone. 
> 
 
Come now, why not expunge him? The Senatus Romanus has
enough power and 
influence to pester a citizen, so why can't they do it
again? Voices of 
dissent and criticism are normal for every society.
Wanting them to leave 
will only harden their opposition. 
 
 
 
Oppius Flaccus Severus scripsit: 
--------------------------------------- 
 
> Having watched our elected magistrates try
and 
> bend over backwards in accommodation of M.
Apollonius, 
> S. Apollonius and Manius Villius (hereafter,
referred 
> to as the traitors.) Endless attempts at noble
compromise 
> have been met with nothing but shock
sensationalism, 
> muckraking, overtly communist ideals and overall
utter 
> disregard for anything worthwhile here in Nova
Roma. 
> 
 
Proof please. What compromise has been offered I did
not agree with? What 
magistrates have "bent over" to accomodate
to my demands? 
 
(snipped) 
 
> You three have done nothing but 
> stir discontent, voice vocal opposition to
everything 
> that you despise (which is seemingly
*everything,* 
> except your own point of view.) 
 
I think this is utter cr�p. Do you honestly think I
enjoy being marked as a 
firestarter? Absolutely not. I have respect for
opinions that differ from 
mine. But should I truly respect those who continue to
insult me (and my 
fellow gentiles) and constantly talk beside the issue
whilst attacking the 
sender and not the sent message? My patience with some
people here is 
running out just as well, my friend. 
 
(snipped) 
 
> How many hours must you spend trying to dissect
and unravel 
> our micronation with your infinitely long
diatribe posts? 
> Your (collective 'your' here to the traitors,)
communistic 
> views and obsession with macronational events
well outside 
> of your respective countries is truly amazing.
You go on 
> and on about 'rights' and insist on mapping them
to your 
> ultra-communistic ideals. 
> 
 
This is a laughable argument. I am (emphasis does not
mean shouting) NOT A 
COMMUNIST. And I have never said so, or made a
statement that could be 
interpreted as such. And what is so wrong with
'rights'? 
 
> I suppose that any one of you 
> would be the first ones to stand by the side of
Johnny 
> Cochran (since you seem to be so well-versed in
events 
> of my micronation, you'll know full well who he
is) 
 
Actually, I don't. 
 
> and 
> shout out for the rights of murderers. 
 
(snipped) 
 
> Well, unlike our esteemed Senator Audens, I don't
need 
> your vision of a niggling conscience. He was way
too 
> kind to you as is befitting a man of his
respectful 
> nature and Dignitas. 
 
He is respectul without doubt, and possesses dignitas.
But he also talks 
beside the issue, (falsely) analyzing people rather
than to talk about the 
actual issues, making the people the issues rather
than the situations. 
That's one of the reasons why a serious debate is nigh
impossible here. 
After a post or two things become personal, and there
we have it; discussion 
foutu. 
 
> My conscience 
> does quite well on its own, thank you very much.
I'll 
> tell you what else I don't need -your
communistic, 
> "utopian" visions (since you're so
familiar with my macronation, 
> you'll also know that many of us have family
members 
> and friends that died fighting against such
ludicrous 
> governmental systems,) your constant discontent,
your 
> lack of positive ability to build *anything,*
your 
> muckraking, ultra-leftist platitudes, et al. 
> 
 
I find this statement ludicrous on its own. My
great-grandfather was forced 
by the Nazis to become mayor of his town, or else
they'd have shot his 
entire family before his own eyes, and I wouldn't be
here today. Europe as a 
whole suffered under two World Wars and knew the
realistic dangers of the 
Cold War; do you think I would be serious about
extreme political systems? 
No. 
 
(snipped) 
 
> Since you've been so insistent on hammering
our 
> other magistrates, let's hammer on you shall
we? 
 
Here we go... 
 
> Let's see, elected by what -the difference of 
> a tribe? Even at that time, planning scheming
and 
> plotting and working toward your "Nova Nova
Roma" 
> ideal with your friends. (Unfortunately, with
whom 
> you declined to leave.) So, you're barely
elected 
> and since you assumed office what *exactly*
have 
> you done other than blaspheme our Respublica
and 
> create discord and discontent? Well, this
Pleb 
> thinks you in contempt of office and in gross 
> dereliction of duty. 
> 
 
Blaspheme? Are you in a hotline with Roma Antiqua?
There is no "correct" 
interpretation of Roma. Nova Roma as a whole does not
stand for the concept 
"Romanitas"; there are more Roman fields to
graze upon than just NR, with 
its seemingly orthodox view of what is Roman and what
is not. Well, I can 
make that up for myself, thanks very much. 
 
> I second the motion of Consul Germanicus in 
> requesting your immediate resignation. If
not, 
> then perhaps the Comitia Plebis Tributa
should 
> convene regarding the matter of your
incompetence 
> and true dedication to the ideals and
institutions 
> of the Respublica. 
> 
 
Incompetence? Other than your extreme dislike for the
man and his opinions, 
there is no reason for such. 
 
> Draco: words fail me. You have definitely
done 
> some nice work in the Musarum, but beyond
that 
> your insistence in supporting Formosanus at
all 
> costs and with your recent incident of
muckraking 
> and sensationalism (yes citizens, I believe
in 
> plain speak) has left me with frankly nothing
but 
> shock and contempt. 
 
But perhaps, you might take a look at the facts I
presented. Most of them 
were true. Judge my facts, and then judge me -- not
the other way around. 
 
> I can but simply implore you 
> here to disband from Formosanus and join the 
> rest of us that wish to build a strong
Respublica. 
> If you cannot, then I cannot but help view
you 
> as a traitor. 
> 
 
What have I betrayed then? As far as I know,
nothing. 
 
> Manius Villius: Am not sure why you joined 
> Nova Roma at all, as you can but only seem to
find fault with 
> anything said by those other than Formosanus, 
> Draco and their supporters - but I would say
the 
> same to you as Draco -abandon the anti-Nova
Roman 
> sentiment and work with us to actually build
something. 
> If you can build other than continually bash 
> the Respublica and its magistrates on the
mainlist, 
> then I would gladly welcome you. Otherwise,
you 
> but are just another sewn seed of discontent. 
> 
 
I think the three (although I cannot speak for
Limitanus) of us have stayed 
here just because we love the concept of NR, and would
like it to be 
different from what it is now. If we didn't care, we
would have left a long 
time ago. 
 
> In closing mi Quirites, I realize that some
of 
> what has been said here will likely offend or
bring 
> on the usual continual attack-and-defend
posts. 
> So be it. It's time we woke up and got
"real", so 
> to speak. 
> 
 
I'm not offended. But I can't tell you how bad my
heart feels to see that 
you accuse of me of things that are completely
untrue. 
 
Valete, 
Sextus Apollonius Draco, 
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725 
Darkling_Crawler, Yahoo IM 
 
"You don't need eyes to see, you need
vision" (Maxi Jazz) 
 
</tt>

 



<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1"


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop bashing governments)
From:	Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 17:44:41 +1000

Ave

You make an excellent point Gaius Sentius Sura in disassociating Stalinism
and Communism and the point should of course also be made for most if not
all of the practicing communist nations (past and present) including the
ones of course, that have recently fallen. Travelling around Eastern
Europe, one can quickly discern the damage that man kind has done to the
very ideal that Karl Marx developed in Manifesto. I now believe that Marx
Communism would never work, as I believe that Man by his very nature is
selfish. I guess I am a pseudo capitalist now, however I am a firm believer
in Social Justice, the Oz way - where a community provides a social safety
net for people, but the system does not curtail ingenuity and creativity. I
don't believe that my values are out of line with that of Nova ....

& by the way - can't we all start to be friends on this list - some of the
continued fighting here is not consistent with the virtues of Nova Roma and
I for one am getting tired of it - let's turn this list into something
positive.

Vale

Marcus Sentius Claudius

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Anguston [mailto:gaiussentius@--------]
Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2001 5:14 Pm
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop bashing governments)

Avete omnes and Oppius Flaccus,

It's amazing, isn't it? You'd think that Communism and
Fascism were so different, wouldn't you?
Well....NEWSFLASH people, they are different! By
definition, Stalin and the USSR's Communism would be a
Fascist state! If you are going to bash Communism in
the style labelled below in your address to Draco,
please have the foreknowledge about the true tennats
of Communism, and quit referring to Stalinism as
Communism. The label is just a convenient name. I
suggest you read Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.

I am not a communist, as I see it as a system that
cannot possibly work. Saying it would work is like
saying that the Athenian type of pure-bred democracy
would be feasible in today's world. But it's a nice
thought, isn't it? A utopian society where everyone is
equal, no-one better than anyone else. The sad thing
is, it is the petty and the greedy who refer to
Communism as evil (I do not mean to insult you
personally mi Oppi, it's just a generalisation). Why
do I say this, you ask? Because, of course, it would
mean that the rich would have to give up their wealth
to help their poorer brethren....and we can't have
that happen, now can we?;-) Why do you think America
has come to fear Communism so much (apart from the
obvious Stalinistic traits)? It is because it is a
threat to the rich classes of the US. Let me put it
this way....many of the top 10 richest people on Earth
are Americans (I'd like it to be known that I have
nothing against Americans, I'm just making a point),
and their combined wealth equals somewhere around the
upper billions to the trillions. And may the gods
forbid anyone else should have that money, such as the
poor. The fear of communism is brought about by the
corporations who dominate the western world, and after
all, money is power, and for the most part everyone
has their price.

Anyway, those are just my two cents on this part of
the topic. For those of you who have an extremely
heartfelt hatred of the "TRUE" form of Communism and
its "EXISTENCE", maybe it's time to tell you that the
Tooth Fariy doesn't exist, Santa Claus is just your
parents bringing you presents and so is the Easter
Bunny!:-))

Sorry to bring this up and bore you, I just felt it
needed to be aired for academic reasons, from one
person who has spent a lot of time studying government
forms throughout history.

Valete bene omnes,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

--- "S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
wrote:
<HR>
<html><body>
<tt>
Salvete Quirites, 
 
Over the past 24 hours, I have witnessed things here
on this list beyond 
belief. Allow me to reply to some people (I'll try to
be as short and to the 
point as possible). 
 
 
Gaius Cassius Nerva scripsit: 
----------------------------------- 
 
> Use of the word "kid" to designate
those in Draco's age range is 
> common and is not considered at all to be
derogatory. 
> 
> However, I apologise if I hurt the boy's
feelings. 
 
It's not common to designate my age range by the use
of the word "kid" (at 
least not over here). And neither am I a
"boy", old man. 
 
> Enter your vote today! A new poll has been
created for the 
> novaroma group: 
> 
> Woah!Germy wants Formy to quit! Should 
> Formosanus leave Nova Roma? 
> 
> o leave 
> o stay 
> 
 
The only person whoever used the term
"Formy" in public was Sulla, so I 
suspect the creator of this poll was one of the people
of his circle. And 
since it was appearently a troll, and the only person
who came in trolling 
here so far was Festus/Nerva, I suspect even stronger
it was him. In any 
case, this is a sad and childish attempt at humour. I
think the Curatrix 
Sermonis acted correctly here -- you won't hear me
complain. 
 
 
 
Flavius Vedius Germanicus scripsit: 
------------------------------------------ 
 
(snipped) 
 
> Otherwise, your rash accusations about
conspiracies among the "Oligarchy" 
> and your demands for punishment of apparent
innocent error, are obviously 
> merely yet another attempt on your part to foment
dissent and disruption 
> within our Republic. You have publically (if
mistakenly) admitted that you 
> despise Nova Roma, and you have privately told me
that you intend to 
resign 
> eventually anyway. One can only think the only
reason you have not yet 
done 
> so is to be able to throw yet more
monkey-wrenches into the works before 
you 
> finally do bless us with your back. 
> 
 
Innocent error? This is nowhere near proven. Nor is
the contrary, but I 
would like to point out here that you seem to be as
prejudiced as 
Formosanus. 
 
> I have had enough of your lies and
misrepresentations, I have had enough 
of 
> your transparent attempts to disrupt the growth
and prosperity of Nova 
Roma, 
> I have had enough of your self-righteous
indignation, and I have had 
enough 
> of you. 
> 
> I hereby call upon you, Marcus Apollonius
Formosanus, to resign your 
> Citizenship and offices, and never darken our
door again. You are 
obviously 
> miserable here (other than whatever glee you
derive from causing grief for 
> well-meaning men and disorder for our Republic as
a whole). Your idea of 
> what Nova Roma should be is so far from what the
vast majority of Cives 
> think as to be laughable, and yet your insistance
that the rest follow 
your 
> vision becomes shriller and more tedious with
every passing day. What 
> positive contributions you do make are few and
far between, and are 
> completely overwhelmed by your main passtime;
tearing down and complaining 
> about the work of others, and assaulting their
character and persons. 
> 
 
If that is not a personal attack, I wonder what it is.
What "demands" 
Formosanus ever made were unreasonable? There were
some, probably, but 
certainly not all. I'd also be careful in assessing
that everyone follows 
your view and not his. All three leges have passed,
but there was a rather 
significant minority that voted against them. The fair
way to follow after a 
complaint would to research it, not to complain about
the complainer. And if 
that person keeps complaining, he or she is either
simply a natural born 
complainer, or the people he or she is complaining to
simply won't listen. 
You prefer to think of the former possibility. I do
not. 
 
> In short, you and we will both be happier once
you are gone. 
> 
 
Come now, why not expunge him? The Senatus Romanus has
enough power and 
influence to pester a citizen, so why can't they do it
again? Voices of 
dissent and criticism are normal for every society.
Wanting them to leave 
will only harden their opposition. 
 
 
 
Oppius Flaccus Severus scripsit: 
--------------------------------------- 
 
> Having watched our elected magistrates try
and 
> bend over backwards in accommodation of M.
Apollonius, 
> S. Apollonius and Manius Villius (hereafter,
referred 
> to as the traitors.) Endless attempts at noble
compromise 
> have been met with nothing but shock
sensationalism, 
> muckraking, overtly communist ideals and overall
utter 
> disregard for anything worthwhile here in Nova
Roma. 
> 
 
Proof please. What compromise has been offered I did
not agree with? What 
magistrates have "bent over" to accomodate
to my demands? 
 
(snipped) 
 
> You three have done nothing but 
> stir discontent, voice vocal opposition to
everything 
> that you despise (which is seemingly
*everything,* 
> except your own point of view.) 
 
I think this is utter cr�p. Do you honestly think I
enjoy being marked as a 
firestarter? Absolutely not. I have respect for
opinions that differ from 
mine. But should I truly respect those who continue to
insult me (and my 
fellow gentiles) and constantly talk beside the issue
whilst attacking the 
sender and not the sent message? My patience with some
people here is 
running out just as well, my friend. 
 
(snipped) 
 
> How many hours must you spend trying to dissect
and unravel 
> our micronation with your infinitely long
diatribe posts? 
> Your (collective 'your' here to the traitors,)
communistic 
> views and obsession with macronational events
well outside 
> of your respective countries is truly amazing.
You go on 
> and on about 'rights' and insist on mapping them
to your 
> ultra-communistic ideals. 
> 
 
This is a laughable argument. I am (emphasis does not
mean shouting) NOT A 
COMMUNIST. And I have never said so, or made a
statement that could be 
interpreted as such. And what is so wrong with
'rights'? 
 
> I suppose that any one of you 
> would be the first ones to stand by the side of
Johnny 
> Cochran (since you seem to be so well-versed in
events 
> of my micronation, you'll know full well who he
is) 
 
Actually, I don't. 
 
> and 
> shout out for the rights of murderers. 
 
(snipped) 
 
> Well, unlike our esteemed Senator Audens, I don't
need 
> your vision of a niggling conscience. He was way
too 
> kind to you as is befitting a man of his
respectful 
> nature and Dignitas. 
 
He is respectul without doubt, and possesses dignitas.
But he also talks 
beside the issue, (falsely) analyzing people rather
than to talk about the 
actual issues, making the people the issues rather
than the situations. 
That's one of the reasons why a serious debate is nigh
impossible here. 
After a post or two things become personal, and there
we have it; discussion 
foutu. 
 
> My conscience 
> does quite well on its own, thank you very much.
I'll 
> tell you what else I don't need -your
communistic, 
> "utopian" visions (since you're so
familiar with my macronation, 
> you'll also know that many of us have family
members 
> and friends that died fighting against such
ludicrous 
> governmental systems,) your constant discontent,
your 
> lack of positive ability to build *anything,*
your 
> muckraking, ultra-leftist platitudes, et al. 
> 
 
I find this statement ludicrous on its own. My
great-grandfather was forced 
by the Nazis to become mayor of his town, or else
they'd have shot his 
entire family before his own eyes, and I wouldn't be
here today. Europe as a 
whole suffered under two World Wars and knew the
realistic dangers of the 
Cold War; do you think I would be serious about
extreme political systems? 
No. 
 
(snipped) 
 
> Since you've been so insistent on hammering
our 
> other magistrates, let's hammer on you shall
we? 
 
Here we go... 
 
> Let's see, elected by what -the difference of 
> a tribe? Even at that time, planning scheming
and 
> plotting and working toward your "Nova Nova
Roma" 
> ideal with your friends. (Unfortunately, with
whom 
> you declined to leave.) So, you're barely
elected 
> and since you assumed office what *exactly*
have 
> you done other than blaspheme our Respublica
and 
> create discord and discontent? Well, this
Pleb 
> thinks you in contempt of office and in gross 
> dereliction of duty. 
> 
 
Blaspheme? Are you in a hotline with Roma Antiqua?
There is no "correct" 
interpretation of Roma. Nova Roma as a whole does not
stand for the concept 
"Romanitas"; there are more Roman fields to
graze upon than just NR, with 
its seemingly orthodox view of what is Roman and what
is not. Well, I can 
make that up for myself, thanks very much. 
 
> I second the motion of Consul Germanicus in 
> requesting your immediate resignation. If
not, 
> then perhaps the Comitia Plebis Tributa
should 
> convene regarding the matter of your
incompetence 
> and true dedication to the ideals and
institutions 
> of the Respublica. 
> 
 
Incompetence? Other than your extreme dislike for the
man and his opinions, 
there is no reason for such. 
 
> Draco: words fail me. You have definitely
done 
> some nice work in the Musarum, but beyond
that 
> your insistence in supporting Formosanus at
all 
> costs and with your recent incident of
muckraking 
> and sensationalism (yes citizens, I believe
in 
> plain speak) has left me with frankly nothing
but 
> shock and contempt. 
 
But perhaps, you might take a look at the facts I
presented. Most of them 
were true. Judge my facts, and then judge me -- not
the other way around. 
 
> I can but simply implore you 
> here to disband from Formosanus and join the 
> rest of us that wish to build a strong
Respublica. 
> If you cannot, then I cannot but help view
you 
> as a traitor. 
> 
 
What have I betrayed then? As far as I know,
nothing. 
 
> Manius Villius: Am not sure why you joined 
> Nova Roma at all, as you can but only seem to
find fault with 
> anything said by those other than Formosanus, 
> Draco and their supporters - but I would say
the 
> same to you as Draco -abandon the anti-Nova
Roman 
> sentiment and work with us to actually build
something. 
> If you can build other than continually bash 
> the Respublica and its magistrates on the
mainlist, 
> then I would gladly welcome you. Otherwise,
you 
> but are just another sewn seed of discontent. 
> 
 
I think the three (although I cannot speak for
Limitanus) of us have stayed 
here just because we love the concept of NR, and would
like it to be 
different from what it is now. If we didn't care, we
would have left a long 
time ago. 
 
> In closing mi Quirites, I realize that some
of 
> what has been said here will likely offend or
bring 
> on the usual continual attack-and-defend
posts. 
> So be it. It's time we woke up and got
"real", so 
> to speak. 
> 
 
I'm not offended. But I can't tell you how bad my
heart feels to see that 
you accuse of me of things that are completely
untrue. 
 
Valete, 
Sextus Apollonius Draco, 
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725 
Darkling_Crawler, Yahoo IM 
 
"You don't need eyes to see, you need
vision" (Maxi Jazz) 
 
</tt>

 



<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1"


Subject:	Concordia failed (Re: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop bashing governments))
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 00:56:07 -0700

<Snip>

> & by the way - can't we all start to be friends on this list - some of the
> continued fighting here is not consistent with the virtues of Nova Roma and
> I for one am getting tired of it - let's turn this list into something
> positive.

Ave,

My Gens member, Secunda Cornelia Valeria, tried to open up communication
with the Paterfamilias of the Gens Apollonia. (This was briefly
described in a post called Concordia I posted a few days ago.) In a
recent conversation, I was informed he was not in favor of any
reconciliation and would continue to attempt his objective. His
intention to ruin my political career in Nova Roma and have me resign
from Nova Roma. I once again request M. Apollonius to disavow himself
of this intention and respect the wishes of the Citizens of Nova Roma
and publically swear an Oath that you will cease your vendetta against
myself and the Gens Cornelia.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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


Subject:	RE: Concordia failed (Re: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop ba shing governments))
From:	Mark A Bird <mark_a_bird@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 18:00:13 +1000

Ave Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

I find this sad - and I will openly say that of all the Citizens in Nova,
you are one of the few that have helped me settle in - and which I greatly
appreciate. I find such actions deplorable and would appreciate the
Paterfamilias of the Gens Apollonia to attempt reconciliation and if this is
not possible, to refrain from such actions via the public list.

Marcus Sentius Claudius

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix [mailto:alexious@--------]
Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2001 5:56 Pm
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Concordia failed (Re: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop
bashing governments))

<Snip>

> & by the way - can't we all start to be friends on this list - some of the
> continued fighting here is not consistent with the virtues of Nova Roma
and
> I for one am getting tired of it - let's turn this list into something
> positive.

Ave,

My Gens member, Secunda Cornelia Valeria, tried to open up communication
with the Paterfamilias of the Gens Apollonia. (This was briefly
described in a post called Concordia I posted a few days ago.) In a
recent conversation, I was informed he was not in favor of any
reconciliation and would continue to attempt his objective. His
intention to ruin my political career in Nova Roma and have me resign
from Nova Roma. I once again request M. Apollonius to disavow himself
of this intention and respect the wishes of the Citizens of Nova Roma
and publically swear an Oath that you will cease your vendetta against
myself and the Gens Cornelia.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the Network Administrator on +61 3 9667 6699.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been scanned
for the presence of computer viruses and inappropriate content.
**********************************************************************

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Gone for a while
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 09:51:04 +0200

Salvete Quirites,

Since I don't want to drag these pointless and fruitless debates further here, I won't reply to any replies sent to me on this list for a while -- not because I can't, but because I won't. On an ending note, I have heard from several sources that the poll-troll was no one from the Sullan circles, so for casting that suspicion, I most humbly apologize.

I will however not apologize for my initial posting on Nerva/Festus. 3/4 of it still stands, and 1/4 is in the neutral zone, neither proven nor disproven.

Well, I'm going to switch to web mode for a while to give my soul some peace, and to think about Nova Roma.

Valete bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] For the record...
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 09:29:13 +0200

Salve!

> For the record, the "poll" was *not* mine. I have my own
> suspiscion as to the prankster, but to accuse without more than
> circumstantial evidence is rather, uh, Draconian, shall we say?
>
> Nerva

Well, arright lad. Then I take your word for it.

Vale bene,
Draco

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Troll Post/Poll
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 01:22:14 -0700

With all the hoopla about the Troll post/poll...can we please know who
actually started it?

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Concordia..who cares?
From:	Kanat Elibol <kelibol@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:33:47 +0300

Avete Omnes...
For days I've been reading the fiery posts flying around between
the members of the two
respectable gens and their opponents and supporters...What have we so
far?Silly names,
accusations,attacks,insults...And who will benefit from those...let me
tell you...noone!Some may
say that this is the 'natural flow of the politics' but this is
becoming rather 'unnatural' lately!
Now,I've respect for the gens Apollonia and her members...does
this make me a 'traitor'?
Do some people here want me to pack up and hit the road for this?And if
there are other silent
and just because this, wiser, people out there who are sharing some of
the same views..should
they leave too?What is happening to us?Is this the way the majority
show its power?
Here,I must state another fact..I also respect the gens
Cornelia...the honest and good work
they've performed for the welfare of the res publica are undeniable and
worthy of praise!Now,
do you applaud me for that?Or yell a 'booo!'!..
As a common citizen...I'm bored to death with the current
argument on who is a communist,
a Nazi or a child!Knowing that this is really unproductive and a waste
of time!Thinking..how
could we use that time to produce new ideas,new views and new but more
mature discussions..
Finally, I'm not going to call for the Concordia...it is obvious
that noone cares!
Instead, Ladies and Gentlemen (Sorry,I can't say that in
Latin..) I'll try my luck for some
'common sense'!.......
Valete bene
Publius Sentius Rutilianus Dexion

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 04:24:26 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, L. Sicini Druse.

--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
<<snipped>>

> Salvete,
>
> There was no fixed size to Roman juries. The more serious the charge,
> the larger the jury, for example a charge of Murder would entail a
> larger jury than a charge of Extortion. Also Since the verdict was by
> majority vote the number of jurors was allways an odd number to
> lessen
> the chance of a tied vote. Since it was possible for a juror to turn
> in a mismarked ballot rather than voting Absolvo or damno, if a tie
> did occur, the verdict was considered for aquital.
>
> Many of the details of how a Roman jury was composed depend on what
> year you wish to pick. The Roman jury system was in constant flux
> during the late Republic. I Consider Sulla's reforms of the system to
> be a major event that we would do good to emulate (save his return to
> all Senatorial Juries). Most of Sulla's laws were short lived, but
> his
> court system was refined, not abolished.
>
> Vale,
> L. Sicinius Drusus

A very interesting proposition, and erudite, too. As you always make
posts that seem to me well balanced and extremely sensible, I guess
that your recommendation of Sulla's laws will be pretty appropriate.

Maybe you could post a few description of the Sullan jury system, just
to give a few ideas to the civil law committee.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Polybios ON THE ROMAN CONSTITUTION AT ITS PRIME
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 07:37:11 EDT

As promised:
QFM

BOOK VI. 11

ON THE ROMAN CONSTITUTION AT ITS PRIME

11. From the crossing of Xerxes to Greece. . .and for thirty years after this
period, the Roman constitution was always one of those polities which was an
object of special study, and it was at its best and nearest to perfection at
the time of the war against Hannibal, the period at which I interrupted my
narrative to deal with Rome. Therefore now that I have described the growth,
I will explain what were the conditions at the time when by their defeat at
Cannae (216 BCE) the Romans were brought face to face with disaster.
I am quite aware that to those who have been born and bred under the Roman
Republic my account of it will seem somewhat imperfect owing to the statement
of certain details you are already aware of. For as you have complete
knowledge of it and practical acquaintance with all its parts, having been
familiar with these customs and institutions from your childhood, you will
be struck by the extent of the information I have to give but will demand in
addition all I have omitted: I ask you not think that the author has
purposely omitted small peculiarities, but that owing to ignorance he has
been silent regarding the origins of many things and some points of capital
importance.
Had I mentioned them, you would not have been impressed by my doing so,
regarding them as small and trivial points, but as they are omitted you will
demand their inclusion as if these were vital matters, through your desire to
appear better informed than the author.
Now a good critic should not judge authors by what they omit, but by what
they relate, and if he finds any falsehood in this, he may conclude that the
omissions are due to ignorance; but if all the writer says is true, he should
admit that he has been silent about these matters deliberately and not from
ignorance. These remarks are meant for those who find fault in the authors
mean rather than just spirit. . . .
In so far as any view of a matter we form applies the right occasion, so far
expressions of approval or lame are sound. When circumstances change, and hen
applied to these changed conditions, the most excellent and true reflections
of authors seem often not only not acceptable, but utterly offensive. . . .
However I write for Greece not Rome, so my people will better understand
yours.
The three kinds of government that I spoke of above all shared in the control
of the Roman state.
And such fairness and propriety in all respects was shown in the use of these
three elements for drawing up the constitution and in its subsequent
administrantion that it was impossible even for a native to pronounce with
certainty whether the whole system was aristocratic, democratic, or
monarchical. This ,was, indeed only natural. For if one fixed one's eyes on
the power of the consuls, the constitution seemed completely monarchical and
royal; if on that of the senate it seemed again to be aristocratic; and when
one looked at the power of the masses, it seemed clearly to be a democracy.
The parts of the state falling under the control of each element were and
with a few modifications still are as follows:
12. The consuls, previous to leading out their 1egiones, exercise authority
in Rome over all public affairs, since all the other magistrates except the
tribunes are under them and bound to obey them, and it is they who introduce
foreign embassies to the senate.
Besides this it is they who consult the senate on matters of urgency, they
who carry out in detail the ,provisions of its decrees. Again as concerns all
affairs of state administered by the people it is their duty to take these
under their charge, to summon assemblies, to introduce measures, and to
preside over the execution of the popular decrees.
As for preparation for war and the general conduct of operations in the
field, here their power is almost unrestrained; for they are empowered to
make what demands they choose on their allies, to appoint military tribunes,
to levy soldiers and select those who are fittest for service. They also have
the right of inflicting, when on active service, punishment on anyone under
their command; and they are authorized to spend any sum they decide upon from
the public funds, being
accompanied by a quaestor who faithfully executes their instructions.
So that if one looks at this part of the administration alone, one may
reasonably pronounce the constitution to be a pure monarchy or kingship. I
may remark that any changes in these matters or in others of which I am about
to speak that may be made in present or future times do not in any way affect
the truth of the views I here state.
, 13. To pass on to the senate. In the first place it has the control of the
treasury, all revenue and expenditure being regulated by its body. For with
the exception of payments made to the consuls, the quaestors are not allowed
to disburse for any particular object without a decree of the senate. And
even the item of expenditure which is far heavier and more important than any
other-the outlay every five years by the censors on public works, whether
constructions or repairs-is under the control of the senate, which makes a
grant to the censors 'for the purpose. Similarly crimes committed in Italy
which require a public investigation, such as treason, conspiracy, poisoning,
and assassination, are under the jurisdiction of the senate. Also if any
private person or community in Italy is in need of arbitration or indeed
claims damages or requires consoling or protection, the senate attends to all
such matters. It also occupies itself with the dispatch of all embassies sent
to countries outside of Italy for the purpose either of settling differences,
or of offering friendly advice, or indeed of imposing demands, or of
receiving submission, or of declaring war; and in like manner with respect to
embassies arriving in Rome it decides what reception and what answer should
be given to them. All these matters are in the hands of the senate, nor have
the people anything whatever to do with them. So that again to one residing
in Rome during the absence of the consuls the constitution appears to be
entirely aristocratic; and this is the conviction of many Greek states and
many of the kingdoms (Polybios is referring to the domains of Alexander's
successors qfm), as the senate manages all business connected with them.
14. After this we are naturally inclined to ask what part in the constitution
is left for the people, considering that the senate controls all the
particular matters I mentioned, and, what is most important, manages all
matters of revenue and expenditure, and considering that the consuls again
have unrestricted authority as regards armaments and operations in the field.
But nevertheless there is a very important part left for the people. For it
is the people which alone has the right to confer honors and inflict
punishment, the only bonds by which kingdoms and states and in a word, human
society in general are held together. For where the distinction between these
is overlooked or is observed but ill applied, no affairs can be properly
administered.
How indeed is this possible when good and evil men are held in equal
estimation? It is by the people, then, in many cases that offences punishable
by fine are tried when the accused have held the highest office; and they are
the only court which may try on capital charges. As regards the latter ;they
have a practice which is praiseworthy and should be mentioned. Their usage
allows those on trial are their lives when found guilty liberty to depart
openly, thus inflicting voluntary exile on themselves, even only one of the
tribes that pronounce the verdict has not yet voted. Such exiles enjoy safety
the territories of Naples, Praeneste, Tibur, and her civitates foederatae
(allies of the Romans.).
Again it is the people who bestow office on the deserving, the noblest reward
virtue in a state; the people have the power of proving or rejecting laws,
and what is most important of all, they deliberate on the question of war and
peace. Further in the case of alliances, terms of peace, and treaties, it is
the people who ratify all these or the reverse. Thus here again one might
plausibly say that the people's share in the government is the greatest, and
that the constitution is a democratic one.
15. Having stated how political power is distributed among the different
parts of the state, I will ow explain how each of the three parts is enabled,
they wish, to counteract or co-operate with the others. The consul, when he
leaves with his army invested with the powers I mentioned, appears deed to
have absolute authority in all matters necessary for carrying out his
purpose; but in act he requires the support of the people and the Senate, and
is not able to bring his operations to a conclusion without them. For it is
obvious that the legiones require constant supplies, and without the consent
of the senate, neither corn, clothing, nor pay can be provided; so that the
commander's plans come to nought, if the senate chooses to be deliberately
negligent and obstructive. It also depends on the senate whether or not a
general can out completely his conceptions and designs, e it has the right of
either superseding him when year's term of office -has expired or of
retaining him in command. Again it is in its power to celebrate h pomp and to
magnify the successes of a general , on the other hand to obscure and
belittle them.
For the the processions they call triumphs, in which the generals bring the
actual spectacle of their achievements before the eyes of their
fellow-citizens, cannot properly organized and sometimes even cannot, held at
all, unless the senate consents and provides the requisite funds. As for the
people it is most indispensable for the consuls to conciliate em, however far
away from home they may be; for, as I said, it is the people which ratifies
or annuls terms of peace and treaties, and what is most important, on laying
down office the consuls are obliged to account for their actions to the
people that in no respect is it safe for the consuls to neglect keeping in
favor with both the senate and the people.
16. The senate again, which possesses such great power, is obliged in the
first place to pay attention to the commons in public affairs and respect the
wishes of the people, and it cannot carry out inquiries into the most grave
and important offences against the state, punishable with death, and their
correction, unless the senatus consultum is confirmed by the people. The same
is the case in matters which directly affect the senate itself. For if anyone
introduces a law meant to deprive the senate of some of its traditional
authority, or to abolish the precedence and other distinctions of the
senators or even to curtail them of their private fortunes, it is the people
alone which has the power of passing or rejecting any such measure. And what
is most important is that if a single one of the tribunes interposes, the
senate is unable to decide finally about any matter, and cannot even meet and
hold sittings; and here it is to be observed that the tribunes are always
obliged to act as the people decree and to pay every attention to their
wishes.
Therefore for all these reasons the senate is afraid of the masses and must
pay due attention to the popular will.
17. Similarly, again, the people must be submissive to the senate and respect
its members both in public and in private. Through the whole of Italy a vast
number of contracts, which it would not be easy to enumerate, are given out
by the censors for the construction and repair of public buildings, and
besides this there are many things which are farmed, such as navigable
rivers, harbours, gardens, mines, lands, in fact everything that forms part
of the Roman dominion. Now all these matters are undertaken by the people,
and one may almost say that everyone is interested in these contracts and the
work they involve. For certain people are the actual purchasers from the
censors of the contracts, others are the partners of these first, others
stand surety for them, others pledge their own fortunes the state for this
purpose. Now in all these matters the senate is supreme. It can grant tension
of time; it can relieve the contractor if any accident occurs; and if the
work proves to be absolutely impossible to carry out it can liberate him from
his contract. There are in fact many ways which the senate can either benefit
or injure those who manage public property, as all these matters are referred
to it. What is even more important is that the judges in most civil trials,
whether public or private, are appointed from its members, where the action
involves large interests.
So that all citizens being at the mercy of the senate, and looking forward
with alarm to the uncertainty of litigation, are very shy of obstructing or
resisting decisions. Similarly everyone is reluctant to oppose the projects
of the consuls as all are generally and individually under their authority
when in the field.
18. Such being the power that each part has of hampering the others or
co-operating with them, their union is adequate to all emergencies, so that
it is impossible to find a better political system than this. For whenever
the menace of some common danger from abroad compels them to act in concord
and support each other, so great does the strength of the state become, that
nothing which is requisite can be neglected, as all are zealously competing
in devising means of meeting the need of the hour, nor can any decision
arrived at fail to be executed promptly, as all are co-operating both in
public and in private to the accomplishment of the task they have set
themselves; and consequently this peculiar form of constitution possesses an
irresistible power
of attaining every object upon which it is resolved. When again they are
freed from external menace, and reap the harvest of good fortune and
affluence which is the result of their success, and in the enjoyment of this
prosperity are corrupted by flattery and idleness and wax insolent and
overbearing, as indeed happens often enough, it is then especially at we see
the state providing itself a remedy for the evil from which it suffers. For
when one part having grown out of proportion to the others aims at supremacy
and tends to become too predominant, it is evident that, as for the reasons
above given none of the three is absolute, but the purpose of the one can be
counterworked and thwarted by the others, none of them will excessively
outgrow the others or treat them with contempt. All in fact remains in status
quo, on the one hand, because any aggressive impulse is sure to be checked
and from the outset each estate stands in dread of bcing 'interfered with by
the others. . . .

OK kiddies now read our constitution and compare....

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Talk about jumping up and slappin ........
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:25:13 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: domusludus@-------- [mailto:domusludus@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 4:25 PM
>
> While I have written the Germanicus privately, the guilt is somehow
> still bothering me a great deal (who'd a thunk it, eh?). I now wish
> to apologise to Germanicus PUBLICALLY.

While such a public apology is neither necessary nor expected, it is most
heartily accepted. Thanks.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Men and Boys
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:46:59 EDT

Salvete

In English-speaking societies, there is nothing wrong with being a "boy"
and any male right up to senesence is subject to being called a "boy"
either playfully, derisively, affectionately, or provocatively. Many of
us would say that how one reacts to being called a "boy" reveals
something about one's level of maturity. Draco's reaction reveals that he
is not quite as mature as he would like to portray himself to be. Were I
called a "boy" I would simply assume the caller to be revealing
themselves as an idiot, and move on.

Of course in Latin to be addressed as "puer" has other meanings, but none
of this is taking place in Latin.

Now can we please put this and many other inane, pointless, childish, and
seemingly unending threads of drivel to rest or at least take them out of
the public forum of Nova Roma? You are all detracting from the dignitas
of Nova Roma.

Sheesh!

L. Sergius Aust. Obst.

On 5/24/01 1:18 AM coriolanus@-------- (coriolanus@--------) wrote:

>
>
>Quirites,
>
>I must agree with Drusus. Draco is adult according Roman Law so if
>you are attacking him for his age you must be really in the corner.
>
>It is the same thing as Sulla did when made jokes from Petrus
>Longinus low English skills. But if censor who should be protector
>and defender of Roman Virtus make it, it could make it anyone.
>
>And if you are thinking that to be older means to be wiser you are
>wrong. See some posts in this list.
>
>Vale!
>Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
>

illud Latine dici non potest.

(You can't say that in Latin.)

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop bashing governments)
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:47:02 EDT

Salve Gaius Sentius

Nicely put. As V. Putin recently put it in an interview, "Communism is a
beautiful dream" that cannot be realized. I would add "just like the
lesser forms of democracy, which are always subverted, sold out, or
abandoned." This tension between those who espouse democracy and those
who say "Yes, but I need the power to make certain it stays on course" is
always with us. This is *true* in Nova Roma as everywhere else.

Communism differs from the conventional idea of "democracy" only to the
extent that Communism extends the control of the people to the economic
sphere. Hence the conflict between Communism and Capitalism, which is the
real conflict.

Now, what does all this have to do with our Roman Republic? Well the fact
is that we *are* in the throes of the conflict between those who (at
least claim to) want pure democracy and those who "know" that they must
exercize control over the course of the State. The Vedii and their
supporters *have been* controllers from the start - they can't help it
and they mean well by it. Anyone who opposes or disagrees with them is a
villain. On the other hand, we have the Apollonii and their supporters,
who wish to dictate how things will go (but with the best of intentions,
right?), and anyone who opposes or disagrees with them is a villain.

So what's to choose between the control of the Apollonii and the control
of the Vedii? Well, I think it's worth something that Vedius (1) has
actually had a hand in creating something here, and (2) doesn't keep
inflicting all of those rambling, repetitive, forty-page posts on the
list.

And then. of course, we have the PRC (People's Republic of the Cornelii)
who are going to eventually overwhelm all the rest of us by their sheer
numbers. ;-)

Frankly (or should that be "Romanly?") I'm getting sick of all of this,
and I need to get to work.

Vale,

L. Sergius Australicus Obst.

On 5/24/01 2:13 AM Jerry Anguston (gaiussentius@--------) wrote:

>Avete omnes and Oppius Flaccus,
>
>It's amazing, isn't it? You'd think that Communism and
>Fascism were so different, wouldn't you?
>Well....NEWSFLASH people, they are different! By
>definition, Stalin and the USSR's Communism would be a
>Fascist state! If you are going to bash Communism in
>the style labelled below in your address to Draco,
>please have the foreknowledge about the true tennats
>of Communism, and quit referring to Stalinism as
>Communism. The label is just a convenient name. I
>suggest you read Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.
>
>I am not a communist, as I see it as a system that
>cannot possibly work. Saying it would work is like
>saying that the Athenian type of pure-bred democracy
>would be feasible in today's world. But it's a nice
>thought, isn't it? A utopian society where everyone is
>equal, no-one better than anyone else. The sad thing
>is, it is the petty and the greedy who refer to
>Communism as evil (I do not mean to insult you
>personally mi Oppi, it's just a generalisation). Why
>do I say this, you ask? Because, of course, it would
>mean that the rich would have to give up their wealth
>to help their poorer brethren....and we can't have
>that happen, now can we?;-) Why do you think America
>has come to fear Communism so much (apart from the
>obvious Stalinistic traits)? It is because it is a
>threat to the rich classes of the US. Let me put it
>this way....many of the top 10 richest people on Earth
>are Americans (I'd like it to be known that I have
>nothing against Americans, I'm just making a point),
>and their combined wealth equals somewhere around the
>upper billions to the trillions. And may the gods
>forbid anyone else should have that money, such as the
>poor. The fear of communism is brought about by the
>corporations who dominate the western world, and after
>all, money is power, and for the most part everyone
>has their price.
>
>Anyway, those are just my two cents on this part of
>the topic. For those of you who have an extremely
>heartfelt hatred of the "TRUE" form of Communism and
>its "EXISTENCE", maybe it's time to tell you that the
>Tooth Fariy doesn't exist, Santa Claus is just your
>parents bringing you presents and so is the Easter
>Bunny!:-))
>
>Sorry to bring this up and bore you, I just felt it
>needed to be aired for academic reasons, from one
>person who has spent a lot of time studying government
>forms throughout history.
>
>Valete bene omnes,
>
>Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura
>

sic friatur crustum dulce.

(Thus the cookie crumbles.)

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Ostracism
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:47:03 EDT

The Senate has NO POWER to expel anyone from Nova Roma, nor do the
Censores. PLEASE get it right. Only the Comitia Centuriata has that power.

L. Sergius Australicus Obstinatus
Senator

On 5/24/01 1:25 AM coriolanus@-------- (coriolanus@--------) wrote:

>
>
>Ave
>
>Let me ask you to explain what is wrong in my interpretation of this
>poll? It is ostracism. It has no precedens in whole republican.
>history.
>
>Someone said that senate has got enough power to expel Formosanus out
>of NR, and I think that censores have got the power too. But I hope
>they never do it.
>
>Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
>

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Troll Post/Poll
From:	Ira Adams <iadams@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 07:46:54 -0500

Salve Lucius Cornelius

Of course we can't know. That would be too "democratic." Those who know
best what's good for us will keep it to themselves. LOL

We WILL be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

I think I've taken an overdose of Nova Roma.

Late to work.

Vale,

L. Sergius Aust. Obst.

On 5/24/01 3:22 AM Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix (alexious@--------)
wrote:

>With all the hoopla about the Troll post/poll...can we please know who
>actually started it?
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>

cum ballistae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti ballistas habebunt.

(When ballistas are outlawed, only outlaws will have ballistas.)

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Ostracism
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:50:56 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: coriolanus@-------- [mailto:coriolanus@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:25 AM
>
> Someone said that senate has got enough power to expel Formosanus out
> of NR, and I think that censores have got the power too. But I hope
> they never do it.

Actually I don't believe anyone actually said that the Senate has the power
to expel anyone, and if they did they were inaccurate. Neither can the
Censores remove anyone from the Album Civium on their own authority.
According to our Constitution, the only way Citizenship may be involuntarily
revoked is by "means enacted by law" (thusfar we don't have any such laws on
the books), or by a trial in the Comitia Centuriata.

That being said, I don't believe anyone, myself included, has yet mentioned
"expelling" anyone (other than you, above). I asked Formosanus to resign, to
preserve what little Dignitas he has left and spare both him and the rest of
the Republic the anguish and turmoil of his remaining. I still await his
reply to my request.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Ostracism
From:	"Vaughan, Michael ST" <Michael.Vaughan@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:49:00 +0100

L. Cornelius Sulla Felix wrote:
>G. Marcius Coriolanus wrote:
>> Let me ask you to explain what is wrong in my interpretation of this
>> poll?
>What was wrong was your assumption Gaius Marcius. You accused without
>having any facts. Your assumption, in my mind places you in the exact
>same category of Sextus Apollonius when he accused me of approving the
>application of Gaius Cassius Nerva. That is what is wrong with you and
>your post.

Huh? What accusation? What assumption?

Coriolanus wrote: "No matter who is author of this poll (maybe someone from
Sulla's neighbourhood maybe someone else)." Ill-judged, perhaps, to name you
specifically, but the comment is far from a pointed finger, and hardly an
unwarranted assumption - his statement means it could have been _anyone_.
Which, unless the gods-in-the-machine setup the poll, seems fairly
reasonable.

>That isnt the point I was making Gaius Marcius. Nor is it the point I
>am making now. I called you on your ASSUMPTION. You are wrong, just
>like Sextus Apollonius was wrong.

And you seem to be jumping at rabbits.

-michael (mainly) Erroneous
--
"In the future everything will be decided by me." -- Gaius Julius Caesar
Senatus Populusque Romanus 2754 AUC

***********************************************************************
Confidentiality: This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the
above named recipient(s) only and may be confidential and/or
privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action
based on them, nor must you copy or disclose them or any part of their
contents to any person or organisation; please reply to this e-mail
and highlight the error immediately and delete this e-mail and its
attachments from your computer system.

Security Warning: Please note that this e-mail has been created in the
knowledge that Internet e-mail is not a 100% secure communications
medium. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of
security when e-mailing us.

Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and
its attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping
with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are
actually virus free
***********************************************************************

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)
From:	"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:13:40 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
> Salvete omnes; et salve, L. Sicini Druse.
>
> --- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> <<snipped>>
>
> > Salvete,
> >
> > There was no fixed size to Roman juries. The more serious the charge,
> > the larger the jury, for example a charge of Murder would entail a
> > larger jury than a charge of Extortion. Also Since the verdict was by
> > majority vote the number of jurors was allways an odd number to
> > lessen
> > the chance of a tied vote. Since it was possible for a juror to turn
> > in a mismarked ballot rather than voting Absolvo or damno, if a tie
> > did occur, the verdict was considered for aquital.
> >
> > Many of the details of how a Roman jury was composed depend on what
> > year you wish to pick. The Roman jury system was in constant flux
> > during the late Republic. I Consider Sulla's reforms of the system to
> > be a major event that we would do good to emulate (save his return to
> > all Senatorial Juries). Most of Sulla's laws were short lived, but
> > his
> > court system was refined, not abolished.
> >
> > Vale,
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> A very interesting proposition, and erudite, too. As you always make
> posts that seem to me well balanced and extremely sensible, I guess
> that your recommendation of Sulla's laws will be pretty appropriate.
>
> Maybe you could post a few description of the Sullan jury system, just
> to give a few ideas to the civil law committee.
>

Salve,
Prior to Sulla courts were temparary affairs. One of Saturnius' Leges
for example set up a Treason court. Procedures would vary depending on
the Lex that set up the court, and the Court would either have a time
limit by the original Lex, or be ended by a later lex, or just fall
into disuse.

Sulla set up Eight Permanant courts, each dealing with a certain
crime, and each headed by a Praetor, though an Aedile or former Aedile
could be apointed to oversee a given case. Punishment in the case of
guilt was predefined, not up to the Praetor or the Jury. Jury size
depended on the Court, and therefore on the crime a citizen was
charged with.

The Senate was organized in Decuries or groups of ten Senators, with
each Decury headed by a Patrician Senator, prior to the time of Sulla,
and these Decuries were the basis of Jury service under Sulla's
Reform. A number of Decuries chosen by lot would be called apon
creating a poll larger than the number of Jurors needed. The Advcates
could then strike Senators from the Jury until the required number for
that court was met.

Now Since we only have two Praetors rather than Eight (A number set by
Sulla, prior to him the Senate decided how many Praetors were going to
be elected in a given year, Six or Eight.) We shall have to make due
with a lower number of Courts, and I would sugest that we start out
with two, and as Nova Roma grows we could add other courts and either
increase the number of Praetors or follow the precedent of allowing an
Aedile to preside over a case.

With only two general courts we would either have a fixed jury size,
or leave the size up to the Praetor, or have to define the size of the
Jury that would hear the case in the Lex that defined the crime. The
last would be closet to the Sullan system.

If we are to use the inovation of having all citizens liable for Jury
duty, then we would also need the inovation of dividing citizens into
Decuries if we were to follow the Sullan system.

One other thing, Sulla's reform outlawed appeals to the Comitia. Since
only the Comitia Centuriata had the power to mete out the Death
Penality to a citizen, Sulla's Reforms in effect outlawed the Death
Penality for Roman citizens inside Roma. Outside Roma the Imperium of
the Magistrates continued as far as the Death Penality was concerned.
This feature of the Sullan Reforms was ignored from time to time, but
a Magistrate could later be held accountable for doing so, as Ciecro
learned when he was sent into exile by Clodius on the charge of
putting Roman Citizens to death (The Catalina Conspiritors)

Vale
L. Sicinius Drusus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 09:20:08 EDT

Salvete,

If I remember correctly, Quintus Sertorius was elected Quaestor to
replace a resignee from that post. He resigned on 4/16 when he came Tribune.
Now, Oppius Flaccus has been voted into one of the quaestor slots...and
almost immediately, another quaestor, L. Tiberius Sardonicus, has resigned.
We are having a problem keeping quaestors. {Though I do understand Sertorius'
reason for resigning the post over a possible conflict of interest.}

Is this post jinxed?

Gaius Cassius Nerva

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] The Enemies Within? (stop bashing governments)
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 09:25:22 -0400

Salvete

> -----Original Message-----
> From: LSergAust@-------- [mailto:LSergAust@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 8:47 AM
>
> The Vedii and their
> supporters *have been* controllers from the start - they can't help it
> and they mean well by it. Anyone who opposes or disagrees with them is a
> villain.

I must say I take exception to this.

Just because someone disagrees with me does not make them a villain in my
eyes. Good friends of mine disagree with my ideas and policies all the time,
and it doesn't effect our friendship or trigger some sort of vendetta. Heck,
Marcus Cassius and I have argued strenuously over some points, as have
Sulla, Quintus Fabius, Audens, Marcus Octavius,
(fill-in-your-favorite-"oligarch"-here) and I on more than one occasion. But
in the end, as I've often said, its only politics and I am (as most-- but
not all-- of us here are) fully capable of disagreeing with someone on one
issue and turning around and working with them on another.

Those I do label as villains are those who consistently and unthinkingly,
gainsay everything I say, find fault and argument with my every utterance no
matter how benign or well-received it is by everyone else, and who do
nothing but tear down and nibble away at what we're trying to build. Those
who argue when I say that the grass is green and the sky blue, just because
it's me saying it. Those who see any sort of attempt at reaching out and
reconciling as either a trick or a sign of weakness. I should add that I
never initiate such relationships; those who engage in these antics do so
because of their own inability to see past personalities and speak to
substance ("If one of those conservative oligarchs said it, it MUST be
bad!").

Control? No. But I have a definite vision for what Nova Roma can be, and
have tried to guide our Republic accordingly. Thusfar, it seems like the
vast majority of our Citizens agree with that vision, and a vocal few oppose
it.

Is it "control" when one's arguments, one's oratory, and one's passion sway
the hearts and minds of the people? Is it "control" because people of like
mind and similar dreams and aspirations come together to build a community?
Is it "control" when one's vision inspires others to take up their own
vision and together build something greater than the sum of the parts?

Sounds like free will to me.

Next year in the Forum!

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
From:	gcassiusnerva@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 10:09:07 EDT

If you had to pick 5 or 10 favorite books by ancient Roman authors to take to
the deserted island where you would be stranded, which would they be?

Nerva

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jerry=20Anguston?= <gaiussentius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2001 00:45:41 +1000 (EST)

Ave Gaius Cassius,

Hhhmmmm....tough choice!

* Suetonius - Twelve Caesars
* Cassius Dio - Scriptores Historia Augusta
* Caesar - Gallic Wars
* Caesar - Civil Wars
* Procopius - The Secret History
* Virgil - The Aeneid
* Ovid - Metamorphoses
* Josephus - The Jewish War
* Marcus Aurelius - Meditations
* Plutarch - The Makers of Rome

Vale bene,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura

Legatus Australia Medius
Sacerdos Mars Invictus

--- gcassiusnerva@-------- wrote:
<HR>
<html><body>
<tt>
If you had to pick 5 or 10 favorite books by ancient
Roman authors to take to 
the deserted island where you would be stranded, which
would they be? 
 
Nerva 
 
 
[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed] 
 
</tt>

 



<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1"


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Vote Results from the Comitia Populi
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 07:47:59 -0700

Salve Propraetor Luci Pompei;

Gratias multas for the kind words! I will strive live up to the
expectations of the position. I'll take all the luck and good
wishes I can get!

Bene vale in Pace Deorum,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: octavianuslucius@-------- [mailto:octavianuslucius@--------]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 7:16 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Vote Results from the Comitia Populi

Salve Quaestor electus Oppi Flacce Severe.
Congratulations!!!!. Tibi maxime congratulor!!!
I wish you the best of luck in your new office!!!
Vale bene
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus

--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@n...>
wrote:
> In the election for the position of quaestor, 24 tribes voted for
Oppius
> Flaccus Severus and 11 voted for Titus Curius Dannicus. Oppius
Flaccus
> Severus wins the position.
>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[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] Congratulations and Vote Results from the Comitia Populi
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 17:26:07 +0200

Salve Illustrus Oppi Flacce Severe!

I don't share all of your opinions about how to deal with those who
sometimes talk to much! ;-) But You have always been kind to me and my
Provincia so I want to return You kindness and politeness. Congratulations
to becoming a Quaestor and Collegue! I wish You the best of luck!

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://www.acc.umu.se/~kerish/novaroma/main.html
************************************************
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."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 10:34:45 US/Central

Salvete

> If you had to pick 5 or 10 favorite books by ancient Roman authors to take to
> the deserted island where you would be stranded, which would they be?

M Aurelius - "The Meditations"
Livius - "Ab Urbe Condita"
Ovidius - Anything and everything
Petronius � "Satyrica"
Apuleius - "Metamorphoses/The Golden Ass"
Iuvenalis � "Saturae"
Lucretius - "De Rerum Naturae"
Seneca Minor - "Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium"
Vergilius - "Aeneidos"
Sappho - Any decent collection

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Tiberius=20Apollonius=20Cicatrix?= <consulromanus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 16:37:35 +0100 (BST)

Salvete

For me that would be (not necessarily in this order):
- Titus Livius: Ab Urbe Condita
- Publius Vergilius Maro: Aeneis
- Publius Ovidius Naso: Metamorphoses
- Caius Iulius Caesar: Commentarii De Bello Gallico
- Caius Suetonius Tranquillus: De Caesaribus
- Publius Vergilius Maro: Bucolica
- Publius Cornelius Tacitus: Agricola
- Marcus Tullius Cicero: In Catilinam
- Caius Sallustius Crispus: De Catilinae Coniuratione
- Publius Vergilius Maro: Georgica

--- gcassiusnerva@-------- wrote: > If you had to pick 5
or 10 favorite books by ancient
> Roman authors to take to
> the deserted island where you would be stranded,
> which would they be?
>
> Nerva

Valete

=====
Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix
civis Novae Romae
____________________________

"De te autem, Catilina, cum quiescunt, probant; cum patiuntur, decernunt; cum tacent, clamant." (M. Tullius Cicero: In Catilinam I, 20)

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Concordia, Men&Boys, Communism, et al
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:36:09 -0700

Salvete Quiritibus;

A few brief comments on the issues of the day:

RE: Communism, comparatives, forms of government, etc.

Though Gaius Sentius and others have given it a very thorough and thoughtful
treatment (my compliments -and thanks,) of Stalinist
and Marxist visions of Communism (and yes mi Gai,
I have had history lessons and have the read the
'manifesto',) -my post very obviously wasn't
a treatise. The concept of Communism and its very
appellations are just not right (yes, a personal
interpretation here,) for NR and are not something I would *ever*
want to see adopted here in any form or fashion.
Period. Those whom espouse it (regardless of who's
'flavor' they choose to emulate,) do not want anything
even remotely related to Antiqua. Those who
*do not* see it being espoused by certain elements
of the citizenry I would equally accuse of
*not reading* the manifesto in question. So
doing, will very clearly delineate the very things
stated in my original post.

You see, I believe in honesty and forthrightness.
My positions are very clearly stated and I refuse
to represent them as anything more or less than
they actually are. You may like it (or not) or
agree with it (or not,) but in the end you'll at
least know where I stand which is more than can
be said for certain others.

This is about all I plan to say on this particular
subject. Please do not be offended if I don't continue
the discussion. -The usual disclaimers about my
opinion, etc. apply here.

RE: Men and Boys

I will just say that one's age in and of itself
is not enough to disqualify one's opinions and
actions. The actions and opinions of the individual
speaks clearly enough and as citizens; said
actions and opinions should be judged on their
own merits. On this I'm in full agreement with
others that have stated a similar position.

RE: Concordia

Of the 899 cives I see we now have, we will likely
have 899 views of the Roman Virtues. Though I could
have my own 'treatise mode' here regarding our Virtues;
definitions and practices of same -I've already
spoken on these things in the past. For now, I'll
only suffice it to say that having a table of virtues
does not make us perfect or non-contentious. My only
additional comment here is that we would all benefit
of a closer study of our forefathers for both how
they *viewed* the virtues and how they *practiced* the
virtues. It was not a post-modernist quasi-biblical
interpretation. (And no, I'm *not* saying that there's
necessarily anything wrong with the said interpretation;
but it doesn't automagically make it the *right*
interpretation either.)

RE: Oligarchy, powers of the Vedii, etc.

I could not agree more with Consul Germanicus.
He and the other cives accused of "Oligarchy,"
"power-mongering" and the like are *builders.*
Though I'll be the first to admit that Consul
Germanicus and I have had some borderline virulent
differences, he and our other magistrates have
my fullest respect. Personally? I respect those
who build. Those who create. Those who 'do.'
Those who do so, carry vastly more weight in
my book as opposed to those that want to sit
around and reap the benefits sewn by everyone
else. No 'power mongering' to be seen here
mi Quirites; just honest hardworking people
trying to build something that certain others
just never seem to appreciate.

Bene valete in Pace Deorum,
Oppius

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Congratulations and Vote Results from the Comitia Populi
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 08:39:20 -0700

Salve Esteemed Caeso Fabi!

Gratias multas for the kind words! I look forward to working
with you and others (regardless of our any potential differences
of opinion <G> ) and hope to make my tenure a successful one.
I hope to be able to seek your expertise and that of others
who currently hold or have held the position previously.
Again -thank you for the warm welcome! I shall strive to
be deserving of it.

Bene vale,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Caeso Fabius Quintilianus [mailto:tjalens.h@--------]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 8:26 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Congratulations and Vote Results from the Comitia Populi

Salve Illustrus Oppi Flacce Severe!

I don't share all of your opinions about how to deal with those who
sometimes talk to much! ;-) But You have always been kind to me and my
Provincia so I want to return You kindness and politeness. Congratulations
to becoming a Quaestor and Collegue! I wish You the best of luck!

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://www.acc.umu.se/~kerish/novaroma/main.html
************************************************
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."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: A Strange Pattern
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 15:52:08 -0000

Salve

(Apologies if this is a duplicate; it didn't seem to go through the
first time.)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:20 AM
>
> Now, Oppius Flaccus has been voted into one of the quaestor
slots...and
> almost immediately, another quaestor, L. Tiberius Sardonicus, has
> resigned.
> We are having a problem keeping quaestors. {Though I do understand
Sertorius'
> reason for resigning the post over a possible conflict of interest.}
>
> Is this post jinxed?

Perhaps not jinxed, but it does point to a problem which I've
mentioned briefly before and now seems to be even more acute. We seem
to be stuck having to hold elections about once a month. Not only is
this a huge pain for the rogatores and curator araneum (who have to
manage the technical aspects of the election), it also causes more
turmoil here on the main list (as our elections sometimes get
spirited), and harms our immigration (as new citizenship applications
are halted during elections). Add to that the fact that there are
only a limited number of days when elections can be held (and some
months are worse than others in this regard), and we have a definite
problem.

Right now, our Constitution states that elections to fill vacancies
must be held within 30 days, except when there are less than 3 months
left in the term, when the Senate simply appoints a replacement. I
believe that our recent pattern has shown that we need to change
this.

I say that we should just have the Senate fill such vacancies,
sparing our cives these interminable elections, one after another
after another. (Obviously, under our new voting rules, if a by-
election is required because no candidate gets 18 tribes, that by-
election would still take place normally; I'm just talking about mid-
term resignations.)

What say you? Is everyone else as sick of these constant elections as
I am?

Nexty year in the Forum!

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 11:58:17 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:20 AM
>
> Now, Oppius Flaccus has been voted into one of the quaestor slots...and
> almost immediately, another quaestor, L. Tiberius Sardonicus, has
> resigned.
> We are having a problem keeping quaestors. {Though I do understand
Sertorius'
> reason for resigning the post over a possible conflict of interest.}
>
> Is this post jinxed?

Perhaps not jinxed, but it does point to a problem which I've mentioned
briefly before and now seems to be even more acute. We seem to be stuck
having to hold elections about once a month. Not only is this a huge pain
for the rogatores and curator araneum (who have to manage the technical
aspects of the election), it also causes more turmoil here on the main list
(as our elections sometimes get spirited), and harms our immigration (as new
citizenship applications are halted during elections). Add to that the fact
that there are only a limited number of days when elections can be held (and
some months are worse than others in this regard), and we have a definite
problem.

Right now, our Constitution states that elections to fill vacancies must be
held within 30 days, except when there are less than 3 months left in the
term, when the Senate simply appoints a replacement. I believe that our
recent pattern has shown that we need to change this.

I say that we should just have the Senate fill such vacancies, sparing our
cives these interminable elections, one after another after another.
(Obviously, under our new voting rules, if a by-election is required because
no candidate gets 18 tribes, that by-election would still take place
normally; I'm just talking about mid-term resignations.)

What say you? Is everyone else as sick of these constant elections as I am?

Nexty year in the Forum!

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): ante diem IX Kalendas Iunias (May 24)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 16:57:21 +0100

Salvete omnes

This day is marked with QRCF ('Quando Rex Comitiavit Fas' = 'Fas once the
Rex [Sacrorum] makes the announcement') and is like a 'dies intercisus',
which
is both fastus (day devoted to men in which legal busyness can take
place) and nefastus (day devoted to the Gods in which no legal busyness
can take place). The Rex Sacrorum announces to the people when the day
starts to be a "dies fastus". Before that the day is to be considered a
'dies nefastus'.

I remind you that Maius is the month of the 'maiores', the old and the dead.
Maia, the
Lares and the Manes and their mother Mania (Mater Larum) are specially
honoured.

Valete bene in pace deorum

Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Your Long Tails
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:03:59 -0400 (EDT)

Citizen Sura;

While your posts are interesting would it be possible for you to cut off
the long "Tails" on your messages?? This is the second day that I have
been unable to read the Main List without going to the Yahoo Main List
because your "Tails" caused the computer to "give up."

Secondly. I would ask that it is not necessary for the citizens on the
list to tack on long messages to your replies to a post. The post is in
the Yahoo File. Doing so makes the Main List cluttered and difficult to
read.

Respectfully;
Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Comitia Centuriata
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 09:15:11 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete Quirites,

Now that the Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti Censi has
passed it's time to look at the effect that it will
have on the Comitia Centuriata.

III a of the Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti Censi
states "The Censors shall place all capiti censi in
the last century in Class V as defined in the Lex
Vedia Centuriata and those leges which may amend it,
and no other Citizens shall be enrolled therein."

Now consider the number of active citizens we
currently have. The Nova Roma main page places this at
849, but this includes many ghosts, citizens who were
formally active, but no longer take part in our
affairs and will NOT be paying taxes. As a Guess I
would say that at least half of our citizens fall into
this catagory. Add in the active citizens who for
whatever reason won't be paying, and we shall have
around 500 citizens numbered as members of the head
count, leaving around 350 citizens to be divided into
the classes, or 70 per class.

According to the terms of the Lex Vedia Centuriata we
shall have single citizen Centuries as low as the
third class!

Class 1 = 55 Centuries so it's 70 citizens will be in
40 single citizen centuries and 15 two citizen
centuries.

Class 2 = 47 Centuries so it would have 24 single
citizen centuries and 23 two citizen centuries.

Class 3 = 39 Centuries so it would have 8 single
citizen centuries and 31 two citizen centuries.

Class 4 = 30 Centuries so it would have 20 two citizen
centuries and 10 three citizen centuries.

Class 5 = 22 Centuries one of which is reserved for
the Capiti Censi leaving 21 Centuries for it's 70
citizens. That means it would have 14 3 citizen
centuries and 7 four citizen centuries.

Now since 15 centuries in the first class will have
two citizens and 24 centuries in the second class will
have one citizen, so 24 of the citizens in the second
class votes will carry greater weight than 30 citizens
in the first class, and even worse, since there will
be 8 single citizen centuries in the third class which
will have the effect of causing 8 third class citizens
votes to carry more weight than 30 citizens in the
first class!

We simply don't have enough citizens to man 193
Centuries without having this very undesirable side
effect. Now there is a precedent for having 193
Centuries, but I maintain that the Precedent should
read that this is the MAXIMUM number of Centuries, not
the required number.

The Comitia Centuriata grew out of the Legio
assembling to ratify decessions of the King. I
maintain that in the very early days a Century was
exactly what the name implied, 100 Citizens. In Roma's
very early days the number of Centuries was less than
the 193 of later days. If there were only 500 citizens
then there would have only been 5 Centuries. As the
population grew the number of Centuries grew until it
reached 193, and after that time rather than adding
new Centuries, it was decided to increase the size of
the Centuries for voting purposes. This increase in
size probelly started before the 193 was reached as
the citizens who contributed less to Roma's Military
power were given less voice and grouped in Centuries
with more than 100 Citizens.

Since we are in our early days, I think it would be
wise to reduce the number of centuries, to have fewer
than 193, as Roma did in her very early days, and only
consider 193 Centuries as the maximum number, and a
goal for the future rather than the number we use now
with our small population.

Salvete,
L. Sicinius Drusus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: senate appointments
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:06:34 EDT

In a message dated 5/24/2001 8:56:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
germanicus@-------- writes:

<< Right now, our Constitution states that elections to fill vacancies
must be held within 30 days, except when there are less than 3 months
left in the term, when the Senate simply appoints a replacement. I
believe that our recent pattern has shown that we need to change
this.

I say that we should just have the Senate fill such vacancies,
sparing our cives these interminable elections, one after another
after another. (Obviously, under our new voting rules, if a by-
election is required because no candidate gets 18 tribes, that by-
election would still take place normally; I'm just talking about mid-
term resignations.)
>>
Salvete:
I wanted to do this last year, since my consulship was constantly paralyzed by
the elections, especially to do with Rogator. However the popularies cried
foul and
so we were at loggerheads most of the year.

I'd support an SC to this effect, Flavius Vedius. Senatores?

Valete Q. Fabius Maximus.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] a sad day for Nova Roma
From:	"Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus" <kminer_rsg@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:09:46 -0400

Having just begun to ready through the madness being posted, I would like to
make a suggestion to the Senate.
DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, TO CONTINUE TO LET THIS CONTINUE IS A DISGRACE TO
BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED, AND MORE SO TO OUR NATION.
WHAT IS A NEW CIVE JUST JOINING NR TO THINK WHEN THE FIRST THING THEY SEE IS
THIS???
APPOINT A NEUTRAL SOMEONE TO MITIGATE THIS ISSUE ONCE AND FOR ALL. YOU HAVE
THE POWER, USE IT FOR THE GOOD OF YOUR NATION FOR A CHANGE NOT JUST FOR
YOURSELVES.
AND AS FOR THE TWO WARING FACTIONS HERE. WHERE ARE YOUR ROMAN VIRTUES??? YOU
DISGUST ME WITH THIS BEHAVIOR. IT'S A SAD DAY WHEN ON THE VIRGE OF GREATNESS
WE, AS A NATION, WOULD LET THIS HINDER OUR GLORY ONE BIT.
I SAY CAST BOTH OF YOU OUT OF OUR NATION AND TAKE YOUR CHILDISH BEHAVIOR AND
WHATNOT ELSEWHERE.
REMEMBER IT TAKES TWO TO FIGHT.
CTRL
Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus
Praefectus Legionis & Tribuni Militum
Legio VI Victrix Pia Fidelis
Pater, Gens Tiberia of Nova Roma
"Nos Sumus Romae milites, parati stamus ad potestatem et gloriam eius. Roma
est Lux."
"we are soldiers of Rome, for her might and glory we stand ready... She is
the Light"
www.geocities.com/legio_vi
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 10:13:18 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, L. Sicini Druse.

An extremely interesting piece of information, dear Druse. I would like
to know what the members of the civil law commitee think of your
proposals.

BTW, instead of creating a new division system in decuriae, since we
would be already innovating allowing all citizens to take part in the
juries, we could as well innovate a little more and let the already
existing divisions (tribus or centuriae) to take the place of those
senatorial decuriae.

--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:

<<snipped>>

> Salve,
> Prior to Sulla courts were temparary affairs. One of Saturnius' Leges
> for example set up a Treason court. Procedures would vary depending
> on
> the Lex that set up the court, and the Court would either have a time
> limit by the original Lex, or be ended by a later lex, or just fall
> into disuse.
>
> Sulla set up Eight Permanant courts, each dealing with a certain
> crime, and each headed by a Praetor, though an Aedile or former
> Aedile
> could be apointed to oversee a given case. Punishment in the case of
> guilt was predefined, not up to the Praetor or the Jury. Jury size
> depended on the Court, and therefore on the crime a citizen was
> charged with.
>
> The Senate was organized in Decuries or groups of ten Senators, with
> each Decury headed by a Patrician Senator, prior to the time of
> Sulla,
> and these Decuries were the basis of Jury service under Sulla's
> Reform. A number of Decuries chosen by lot would be called apon
> creating a poll larger than the number of Jurors needed. The Advcates
> could then strike Senators from the Jury until the required number
> for
> that court was met.
>
> Now Since we only have two Praetors rather than Eight (A number set
> by
> Sulla, prior to him the Senate decided how many Praetors were going
> to
> be elected in a given year, Six or Eight.) We shall have to make due
> with a lower number of Courts, and I would sugest that we start out
> with two, and as Nova Roma grows we could add other courts and either
> increase the number of Praetors or follow the precedent of allowing
> an
> Aedile to preside over a case.
>
> With only two general courts we would either have a fixed jury size,
> or leave the size up to the Praetor, or have to define the size of
> the
> Jury that would hear the case in the Lex that defined the crime. The
> last would be closet to the Sullan system.
>
> If we are to use the inovation of having all citizens liable for Jury
> duty, then we would also need the inovation of dividing citizens into
> Decuries if we were to follow the Sullan system.
>
> One other thing, Sulla's reform outlawed appeals to the Comitia.
> Since
> only the Comitia Centuriata had the power to mete out the Death
> Penality to a citizen, Sulla's Reforms in effect outlawed the Death
> Penality for Roman citizens inside Roma. Outside Roma the Imperium of
> the Magistrates continued as far as the Death Penality was concerned.
> This feature of the Sullan Reforms was ignored from time to time, but
> a Magistrate could later be held accountable for doing so, as Ciecro
> learned when he was sent into exile by Clodius on the charge of
> putting Roman Citizens to death (The Catalina Conspiritors)
>
> Vale
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Centuriata
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:25:03 US/Central

Salvete Quirites

A few observations, with fewer conclusions...

Heavy amputation of L Sicinius' message leaves us with:
> According to the terms of the Lex Vedia Centuriata we
> shall have single citizen Centuries as low as the
> third class!

However, the Lex Iunia Centuriata (LIC) states:
"This law 'Lex Iunia Centuriata' replaces paragraph I of the law 'Lex Vedia
Centuriata'... Whenever a consul or praetor convenes the comitia centuriata,
the censores are to issue an edict specifying how many centuries are to be
allocated to the classes. By all such edicts, the centuries will be allocated
to five classes such that Class I will have the greatest number of centuries,
and Class V the least."

In other words, I.A through I.E of Lex Vedia Centuriata is replaced with a
flexible schedule restricted only by the simple admonition that Class I have
the most centuries and Class V have the least.

Therefore, the centuries could be arranged to give Class I 186 centuries, Class
II - IV 2 centuries apiece, and Class V a single century. (I expect there
would be some complaint generated by such an arrangement, but it's legal.) So,
it's possible for the censores to do a little wrangling with simple math to
create an arrangement that keeps a position in Class I as advantageous as one
might like.

(Note that LIC is an unsatisfactory fix because it does not require Class II to
have more centuries than Class III and so on.)

That said, I tend to agree with the other points L Sicinius has made. However,
since we still have difficulty convincing 100 cives to vote in a given
assembly, we obviously can't use centuries of 100 people. Otherwise, we come
awfully close to simple majority vote. Indeed, we achieve it if all of our
voters wind up in the same century.

Of course, considering our current centurial demographics and our voting
patterns, I rather suspect that we're conducting something awfully close to
simple majority voting in the centuries as it is.

And, finally, even if there are still single-civis centuries as low as Class
III, it is still more advantageous by odds to reside closer to Class I than
Class V.

Salvete
T Labienus Fortunatus

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 10:23:42 -0700

Salvete Nerve et Quirites;
A most excellent question and pleasant
diversion from the order of the day.

Some Favorites, but not in any particular order:

-Cicero: On the Nature of the Gods
-Pliny the Younger: Letters (any decent collection)
-Celsus: On the True Doctrine
-Caesar: The Conquest of Gaul
-Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica
-Appian: The Civil Wars
-Livy: Early History of Rome

Bene valete,
Oppius

-----Original Message-----
From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 7:09 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books

If you had to pick 5 or 10 favorite books by ancient Roman authors to take
to
the deserted island where you would be stranded, which would they be?

Nerva

<snipped>

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: senate appointments
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:31:45 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: QFabiusMax@-------- [mailto:QFabiusMax@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 1:07 PM
>
> I'd support an SC to this effect, Flavius Vedius. Senatores?

Actually the matter would require an amendment to the Constitution. Since we
have several such amendments being contemplated, including this one in the
vote wouldn't be a difficulty.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Citizenship
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:32:39 -0400 (EDT)

My Dear Applicant;

I am sorry to hear that the "Rough and Tumble" of our discussions are
offensive to you. However, I think it unfair that your solution is to
stand to one side and wait for the tide to recede so that you may
partake at your particular level, rather than to take part and use your
influence and wisdom to calm the List.

You seem to tar everyone in Nova Roma with the same brush, but I assure
you that such is not accurate. Yes, therer are some here who are
argumentative and some who are repititous to a degree of nausia, and
some who are insulting and some who are "weasels", but there are also
hard-working and clever citizens who believe in what we are doing. Very
much as it is on the streets of any city in the world!!!

It probably won't get much better from your position "up on the bank"
since the same situations occur again and again as new people join the
mix, some learn and contribute, some never learn and drop out, some
never learn and stay to say the same things over and over, but that was
part of the involvement of Rome. If you are a student of Rome, but do
not have the ability or desire to "jump in" and get your "tunic dirty"
with the rest of us, then that is your decison of course. But in my
view, I do not interest myself in those who merely watch waiting for
others to adjust to thier level. I have many friends who have "entered
the stream" and made Nova Roma a better place by so doing, but I don't
believe I have one friend who "stands on the bank" watching to see when
the current slackens.

In closing, I hope that you will decide to join us, because as I
encourage those who are in my reenactment unit the three major items of
belonging to any organization is "ATTENDANCE, ATTENDANCE, ATTENDANCE.
All other problems can be worked out but attendance is required to
handle any and all problems.

Respectfully;
Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: senate appointments
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:41:14 US/Central

Tribunus Plebis T Labienus Q Fabio Omnibusque SPD

In re having the Senate replace magistrates who resign their office during
service, Q Fabius scripsit:
> I wanted to do this last year, since my consulship was constantly paralyzed
> by the elections, especially to do with Rogator.� However the popularies
> cried foul and so we were at loggerheads most of the year.
>
> I'd support an SC to this effect, Flavius Vedius.� Senatores?

The procedure is currently part of the constitution. The senatusconsultum you
propose would therefore be unconstitutional and will attract my veto. This
was, IIRC, the reason I was among those who "cried foul" during your consulship.

I base my decision on the following:

Section IV.A of the constitution states, among other things:
"Should an office in mid-term become vacant and suitable candidates are at
hand, an election shall be held in the appropriate comitia to elect a successor
to serve out the remainder of the term within thirty days of the vacancy."

The only exception to this is found in V.D, which states:
"Should a magistrate's office become vacant during the course of his term, the
Senate may appoint a replacement to serve out the remainder of the term should
there be less than three months remaining therein."

Valete

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
From:	"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:42:07 -0400

Hmmm, I can name the authors. Too many to books to pick five favorites.

1.Vergil
2. Ovid
3. Sappho
4. Livius
5. Sulpicia

There ya go, five that would be hard to live without.

--Aeternia

>From: gcassiusnerva@--------
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: [novaroma] Your Favorite Roman Books
>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:09:07 EDT
>
>If you had to pick 5 or 10 favorite books by ancient Roman authors to take
>to
>the deserted island where you would be stranded, which would they be?
>
>Nerva
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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


Subject:	re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 10:48:10 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, consul Germanice.

Once again, I would like to point out my opinion that we should follow
the traditions and customs of Antiqua Roma as long as they are not
absolutely incompatible with modern life.

I think that, when an office became vacant in Roma, elections were not
held again. The office was void until the end of its legal term, and
the substitute was appointed by a specific law.

In this case, I guess that the other Quaestores should handle the work
by themselves alone until December.

I may be wrong, so please correct me if this is the case.

--- Flavius Vedius Germanicus <germanicus@--------> wrote:
> Salve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:20 AM
> >
> > Now, Oppius Flaccus has been voted into one of the quaestor
> slots...and
> > almost immediately, another quaestor, L. Tiberius Sardonicus, has
> > resigned.
> > We are having a problem keeping quaestors. {Though I do understand
> Sertorius'
> > reason for resigning the post over a possible conflict of
> interest.}
> >
> > Is this post jinxed?
>
> Perhaps not jinxed, but it does point to a problem which I've
> mentioned
> briefly before and now seems to be even more acute. We seem to be
> stuck
> having to hold elections about once a month. Not only is this a huge
> pain
> for the rogatores and curator araneum (who have to manage the
> technical
> aspects of the election), it also causes more turmoil here on the
> main list
> (as our elections sometimes get spirited), and harms our immigration
> (as new
> citizenship applications are halted during elections). Add to that
> the fact
> that there are only a limited number of days when elections can be
> held (and
> some months are worse than others in this regard), and we have a
> definite
> problem.
>
> Right now, our Constitution states that elections to fill vacancies
> must be
> held within 30 days, except when there are less than 3 months left in
> the
> term, when the Senate simply appoints a replacement. I believe that
> our
> recent pattern has shown that we need to change this.
>
> I say that we should just have the Senate fill such vacancies,
> sparing our
> cives these interminable elections, one after another after another.
> (Obviously, under our new voting rules, if a by-election is required
> because
> no candidate gets 18 tribes, that by-election would still take place
> normally; I'm just talking about mid-term resignations.)
>
> What say you? Is everyone else as sick of these constant elections as
> I am?
>
> Nexty year in the Forum!
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
> email: germanicus@--------
> AIM: Flavius Vedius
> www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:48:16 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Consul,

> Right now, our Constitution states that elections to fill vacancies must be
> held within 30 days, except when there are less than 3 months left in the
> term, when the Senate simply appoints a replacement. I believe that our
> recent pattern has shown that we need to change this.
> I say that we should just have the Senate fill such vacancies, sparing our
> cives these interminable elections, one after another after another.

These repeated elections are indeed tedious.

We passed a law early this year to provide for backup Rogatores,
in the event that the active Rogatores quit, but this has had the
effect of forcing us to keep four Rogator positions filled instead
of two, and we've had additional elections to fill these new positions.

The two recent elections for Quaestor were the result of the events
of the Ides of March; one Quaestor moved into the Tribunate, and then
his old office needed to be fulfilled. Our newest vacancy is likely a
result of the heated arguments that arose because of this most recent
election. Hopefully the situation will now stabilize.

I agree that the Senate should be empowered to appoint magistrates to
fill vacancies; however, I think this should be limited to the junior
magistracies (excluding Tribune). The offices of Censor, Consul,
Praetor, and Tribune are powerful and it is important that the
Comitia be allowed to choose who will fill those offices. Aediles,
Quaestores, and Vigintisexviri, however, are positions where
hard work is needed but there is little power, and thus giving
the Senate power to appoint them will be acceptable to all but
the most virulent Senate-haters among us.

Vale, Octavius.

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: senate appointments
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:55:11 EDT

In a message dated 5/24/2001 10:46:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
labienus@-------- writes:

<< The procedure is currently part of the constitution. The senatusconsultum
you
propose would therefore be unconstitutional and will attract my veto. This
was, IIRC, the reason I was among those who "cried foul" during your
consulship. >>
Salve
You are correct. You were. And like I said, at that time, iwe need a stop
gap measure before we change the constitution. Because we should change this
provision in the constitution, and as quickly as possible.
And Labienus, I meant no insult when I called you a popularie...I hope you
know that.

Vale Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: senate appointments
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:05:14 US/Central

Salvete Q Fabius et alii

> You are correct.� You were.� And like I said, at that time, iwe
> need a stop gap measure before we change the constitution.�
> Because we should change this provision in the constitution, and
> as quickly as possible.

Unfortunately, no authority short of the comitia centuriata or a dictator can
provide the stop-gap measure you seek. The constitution unequivocally trumps
everything else.

> And Labienus, I meant no insult when I called you a popularie...I
> hope you know that.

I didn't take any offense at the term. I disliked the implication that the
subject was yet another example of a partisan split in the state, with its
commensurate implication that those of us who disagreed with you did so for
partisan, rather than legal, reasons. Nova Roma is far too politicized as it
is.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Comitia Centuriata
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 11:07:46 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, L. Sicini Druse.

Some of you might have been wondering what I mean when I talk about
"reasons that allow us to part from strict Roman tradition". I guess
that Drusus has pointed out a very good example. 193 centuries are just
too many for us to fill, at least at this point of our History (I
wonder what were the solutions taken when Nova Roma had less than 200
citizens ;-) ).

Besides, as Drusus has also pointed out, the original Roman system of
centuries had actually less than 193 centuries. However, I think that 9
centuries are just too few, for they would not allow us to create five
classes with real differences. Maybe we should try to keep a rate
between classes close to the Vedian division:

A. Class I could have 6 centuries;
B. Class II could have 5 centuries;
C. Class III could have 4 centuries;
D. Class IV could have 3 centuries;
E. Class V could have 2 centuries.

That would give us a total of 20 centuries. According to your
calculations, with 70 citizens per class, we would have the following
average number of citizens per century depending on their class:

A. Class I could have 12 citizens per century;
B. Class II could have 14 citizens per century;
C. Class III could have 17 citizens per century;
D. Class IV could have 23 citizens per century;
E. Class V could have 70 citizens in one century and 500 citizens in
the capiti censi century.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Voting system
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 11:14:21 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes.

Following with the "Comitia Centuriata" issue, I have another
suggestion to make. If citizens were allowed to cast a number of votes
equal to the number of offices up for election, then the system would
be far more effective. In that way, we could have the two consuls that
the people really want, by allowing not only centuriae to submit two
votes, but every citizen to do so as well.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Voting system
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 14:26:42 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gnaeus Salix Astur [mailto:salixastur@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:14 PM
>
> Following with the "Comitia Centuriata" issue, I have another
> suggestion to make. If citizens were allowed to cast a number of votes
> equal to the number of offices up for election, then the system would
> be far more effective. In that way, we could have the two consuls that
> the people really want, by allowing not only centuriae to submit two
> votes, but every citizen to do so as well.

Actually this idea has been suggested more than once, and rejected for a
variety of reasons. Among other things, allowing individuals a single vote
but the tribes a multiple vote encourages the diffusion of power among
varying groups and interests. This, I think is one of the things that made
the electorial process in the ancient Republic so successful for so long.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Voting system
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 11:30:11 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, consul Germanice.

--- Flavius Vedius Germanicus <germanicus@--------> wrote:

<<snipped>>

> Actually this idea has been suggested more than once, and rejected
> for a
> variety of reasons. Among other things, allowing individuals a single
> vote
> but the tribes a multiple vote encourages the diffusion of power
> among
> varying groups and interests. This, I think is one of the things that
> made
> the electorial process in the ancient Republic so successful for so
> long.

Yes, but it also meant a divided government, which could hinder the
constructive will of some individuals.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] The Results
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 20:53:40 +0200

M. Apollonius Formosanus Aedilis Plebeius omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.

I must congratulate Censor Sulla and his former collegue Merullus on
the success of the legislation of which they were authors as edicta.
Naturally I consider said legislation to be disasters for the
Respublica, but I am willing to give the authors the credit they are due
for their success, and especially Sulla, who as a consummate politician
is so successful in destroying his opponents.

The two pieces of legislation they sponsored had a very great deal
of valuable content in them. The section on names in general was
excellent in the one edictum/lex, and the clarification of the method
for resigning from Nova Roma in the other was highly useful. Some might
wish to attribute the success of these bills to these good points.

It is extremely regrettable that we were denied the chance to vote
on alternative versions of the name-change bill. The concept of putting
up alternative bills or versions conceptually introduced by Vedius is an
extremely fruitful one which could stand to be used more.

In the end Nova Roma now has discriminatory legislation against the
transgendering, putting it among groups and nations that have no right
or reason for such backwardness in the twenty-first century. It has also
shown a desire to be unwelcoming to the returnee, thus earning distaste
for the meanspiritedness of such a State, not upholding its majesty as
some of its supporters tried to picture the affair.

There are many decent and aware people here who voted against these
morally flawed bills. I am sure that they, like me, will in many cases
be wondering how to react to the declining freedom and dignity of the
individual here. The Oligarchy would perhaps like to forget that many of
us here are not into recreating something so macho, authoritarian and
intrusive as many of them envisage, but simply want a congenially Roman
place to persue their Roman interests. We have not all agreed to take
our notions about human rights, democratic process and all the progress
that has been the flowering of the best of Roman law and ethics and cast
them aside to suit these enthusiasts. Not all of us hanker after the
r�le of Passive Masses to completment the Oligarchy and give them
someone to rule over.

The bill for the punishment of non-taxpaying citizens is to my mind
in a different category, having little moral significance.Nova Roman
citizens have the right to decide to tax themselves if they wish. The
new legislation has tried to be humane in not ejecting non-taxpayers. On
the other hand it does tend to make them second-hand citizens and reduce
their ability to moderate taxes or mandate better means of tax
collection that might enable them to pay taxes. It is, therefore, a
mixed bag. A bigger issue is the fact that at present the Senate, i.e.
the Oligarchy, controls taxation and budgets. Those who remember the
Boston Tea Party with fondness might well take note.

I can also not fail to note the embarassing spectacle of a consul
trying to drive out this citizen who disagrees with him and exposes the
power structure of which he is a prominant part. Apparently he wishes to
move Nova Roma further in the direction of silencing the critics of
those in power. It is a pity that Nova Roma has sunk to such things, I
can only say that I am glad and proud that I did my best to stop the
worst of the present legislation, which greatly degrades our Respublica.
I am only sorry that I failed. But tomorrow is another day.

Valete!

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] The Results
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 15:00:28 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:54 PM
>
> In the end Nova Roma now has discriminatory legislation against the
> transgendering, putting it among groups and nations that have no right
> or reason for such backwardness in the twenty-first century.

Indeed, groups and nations such as Great Britain and the United States.
Indeed, these macronations' laws on the particular subject are much less
flexible than our own, and impact thousands and thousands of people, where
ours impacts no one.

If you really were interested in the plight of the transgendered,
Formosanus, you'd fight the fight where it actually mattered, where you
could change thousands of lives. But you don't. You bray on about it here
where it impacts no one. To you it's just a tool to cause more disruption
and divisiveness in the Republic. Thank you for this eloquent display of
your own hypocricy.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:21:08 -0700

Salvete amice Gai et Omnes;

So you're saying I shouldn't assume office then? :-)
Well, let's me off the hook quite nicely.

My only real comment here is in agreement in accordance
with the practices in Antiqua. As is my well-known position,
this should *always* be the *default* whenever possible.

That being said, I fully support the move to have suddenly
vacated offices appointed by the Senate ***but only in the
case of the junior magistracies*** as suggested by Senator
Marcus Octavius. For whatever it's worth (or not,) my vote
goes in the 'plus' column.

Bene valete,
Oppius (maybe, soon to be Quaestor :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Gnaeus Salix Astur [mailto:salixastur@--------]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 10:48 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern

Salvete omnes; et salve, consul Germanice.

Once again, I would like to point out my opinion that we should follow
the traditions and customs of Antiqua Roma as long as they are not
absolutely incompatible with modern life.

I think that, when an office became vacant in Roma, elections were not
held again. The office was void until the end of its legal term, and
the substitute was appointed by a specific law.

<snipped>

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 15:43:36 -0400

Salve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oppius Flaccus Severus [mailto:oppiusflaccus@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 3:21 PM
>
> That being said, I fully support the move to have suddenly
> vacated offices appointed by the Senate ***but only in the
> case of the junior magistracies*** as suggested by Senator
> Marcus Octavius. For whatever it's worth (or not,) my vote
> goes in the 'plus' column.

I could go with this; seems a sensible solution that would handle the worst
part of the problem.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

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

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] a sad day for Nova Roma
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:43:07 -0700

Salve Casce Tiberi;

You probably won't like what I'm about to say either,
but I'll make it brief:

1-To say it's hypocritical to accuse others of abandoning
the virtues when you are shouting at the top of your
lungs on the Rostra is an understatement. Since I myself have
no personal interest in trying to be the 'morals and virtues'
moderator of Roma's discussions, I will put it to you in
more 'modern' terms: shouting (i.e. excessive use of the
CAPS lock key to try to make one's voice heard above the
rest,) is in most chat and mail venues considered to be the height
of rudeness and in many venues will get one moderated or
removed from the list, flamed or any number of the above.
(And *no*, I am not suggesting any of these things happen
to you, but since you're obviously not aware of them you
may consider it a gentle reminder.)

2-I will further grant that your use of the capslock key
will garner your particular post more 'attention' by
newbies or cives that patrol the archives; but you might
*also* wish to consider what type of attention that will
be.

The rest of your post is beyond comment.

-Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus [mailto:kminer_rsg@--------]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 10:10 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] a sad day for Nova Roma

Having just begun to ready through the madness being posted, I would like to
make a suggestion to the Senate.
DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, TO CONTINUE TO LET THIS CONTINUE IS A DISGRACE TO
BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED, AND MORE SO TO OUR NATION.
WHAT IS A NEW CIVE JUST JOINING NR TO THINK WHEN THE FIRST THING THEY SEE IS
THIS???
<snipped>

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 12:57:44 -0700

Salve Druse!

A very thorough, clear and erudite explanation of the Sullan
court system. My memory was both refreshed (and happily
renewed) with new information. Gratias multas!

Bene vale,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Lucius Sicinius Drusus [mailto:lsicinius@--------]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 6:14 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Juries (WAS A Fair Trial)

<snipped>

Salve,
Prior to Sulla courts were temparary affairs. One of Saturnius' Leges
for example set up a Treason court. Procedures would vary depending on
the Lex that set up the court, and the Court would either have a time
limit by the original Lex, or be ended by a later lex, or just fall
into disuse.

<snipped>

[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: Juries et Polybios
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 13:04:19 -0700

Salve Quinte Fabi!

Just a brief public note of thanks for your excellent posts on
Roman juries and the writings of Polybios. This is *exactly*
the type of thing I came to NR for -learning history in detail.
Again, your thorough knowledge of Roma and astute erudition
provides us all with vast benefit!

Bene vale,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: QFabiusMax@-------- [mailto:QFabiusMax@--------]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 9:00 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Re: Juries

In a message dated 5/23/2001 12:08:16 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
salixastur@-------- writes:

<>
Well having been asked so nicely....
The first judicial body in the Republic was the Senate. Figures right?
Here
are the most learned men in the state, richest also, determining the fate of
some poor dirt farmer.
If the dirt farmer was condemned to die he could appeal that sentence to the
Comitia Curiae.
<snipped>

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

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


Subject:	re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 17:22:15 -0300 (BRT)

On Thu, 24 May 2001, Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:

> Salve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: gcassiusnerva@-------- [mailto:gcassiusnerva@--------]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 9:20 AM
> >
> > Now, Oppius Flaccus has been voted into one of the quaestor slots...and
> > almost immediately, another quaestor, L. Tiberius Sardonicus, has
> > resigned.
> > We are having a problem keeping quaestors. {Though I do understand
> Sertorius'
> > reason for resigning the post over a possible conflict of interest.}
> >
> > Is this post jinxed?
>
> Perhaps not jinxed, but it does point to a problem which I've mentioned
> briefly before and now seems to be even more acute. We seem to be stuck
> having to hold elections about once a month. Not only is this a huge pain
> for the rogatores and curator araneum (who have to manage the technical
> aspects of the election), it also causes more turmoil here on the main list
> (as our elections sometimes get spirited), and harms our immigration (as new
> citizenship applications are halted during elections). Add to that the fact
> that there are only a limited number of days when elections can be held (and
> some months are worse than others in this regard), and we have a definite
> problem.
>
> Right now, our Constitution states that elections to fill vacancies must be
> held within 30 days, except when there are less than 3 months left in the
> term, when the Senate simply appoints a replacement. I believe that our
> recent pattern has shown that we need to change this.
>
> I say that we should just have the Senate fill such vacancies, sparing our
> cives these interminable elections, one after another after another.
> (Obviously, under our new voting rules, if a by-election is required because
> no candidate gets 18 tribes, that by-election would still take place
> normally; I'm just talking about mid-term resignations.)
>
> What say you? Is everyone else as sick of these constant elections as I am?

Salve,

No I am not, but I would like to know how the suffects were designated in
ancient Rome, since under the empire consuls only stayed in office some
monthes, Rome had the same problem how was it solved ?

Vale,

Manius Villius Limitanus

>
> Nexty year in the Forum!
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
> email: germanicus@--------
> AIM: Flavius Vedius
> www: http://mediatlantica.novaroma.org
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

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

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Results
From:	QFabiusMax@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 16:34:26 EDT

In a message dated 5/24/2001 11:53:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
bvm3@-------- writes:

<< I must congratulate Censor Sulla and his former colleague Merullus on
the success of the legislation of which they were authors as edicta.
Naturally I consider said legislation to be disasters for the
Res publica, but I am willing to give the authors the credit they are due
for their success, and especially Sulla, who as a consummate politician
is so successful in destroying his opponents.<<

You know Apollonius, you baffle the Hades out of me.
You start to say something nice and you finish with an attack.
Didn't your mother teach you, "if you cannot say something nice about
somebody don't say anything at all"
If Cornelius Sulla is a consummate politician, then I'm the king of world.
(Don't start with the Cameron jokes, guys)
Nobody destroyed nobody. Did you really expect that he would roll over on
his own edictum? You attacked what you saw were shortcomings, he
defend his and Marius edictum. Very Roman, very civilized.

>>The two pieces of legislation they sponsored had a very great deal
of valuable content in them. The section on names in general was
excellent in the one edictum/lex, and the clarification of the method
for resigning from Nova Roma in the other was highly useful. Some might
wish to attribute the success of these bills to these good points.<<
And the authors thank you for that.

>>It is extremely regrettable that we were denied the chance to vote
on alternative versions of the name-change bill. The concept of putting
up alternative bills or versions conceptually introduced by Vedius is an
extremely fruitful one which could stand to be used more.<<

That is Rome for you. The majority of the people felt your arguments were not
as compelling as you would hope. But take heart. Had the Mari/Sullan
edictum failed, one of the others would have been put up.

>>In the end Nova Roma now has discriminatory legislation against the
transgendering, putting it among groups and nations that have no right
or reason for such backwardness in the twenty-first century. It has also
shown a desire to be unwelcoming to the returnee, thus earning distaste
for the mean spiritedness of such a State, not upholding its majesty as
some of its supporters tried to picture the affair.<<
unwelcoming is not a word. Except, I don't want to be part of the
Twenty-first Cent. And I suspect many others feel the same as well.

>>There are many decent and aware people here who voted against these
morally flawed bills. I am sure that they, like me, will in many cases
be wondering how to react to the declining freedom and dignity of the
individual here.<<
Yes, there were. A fact that proves that Rome as representative democracy
has many diverse and wonderful ideas and feelings.

>> The Oligarchy would perhaps like to forget that many of
us here are not into recreating something so macho, authoritarian and
intrusive as many of them envisage, but simply want a congenially Roman
place to pursue their Roman interests.>>
We are not forgetting. It is your purpose to remind us. Something you do
quite well.
However, recreating the Republic means doing just that. It is not
hodgepodging a Rome from the ideal then adding "enlightened" 21st century
thought.
This is something you seem to keep forgetting. So I will keep reminding you.

>>We have not all agreed to take our notions about human rights, democratic
process and all the progress that has been the flowering of the best of Roman
law and ethics and cast them aside to suit these enthusiasts. Not all of us
hanker after the role of Passive Masses to complement the Oligarchy and give
them
someone to rule over.<<
So noted. But, and this is a big but, you have been far from passive, and I
expect when we get into Law Codes you again will not be passive.

>>The bill for the punishment of non-taxpaying citizens is to my mind
in a different category, having little moral significance. Nova Roman
citizens have the right to decide to tax themselves if they wish. The
new legislation has tried to be humane in not ejecting non-taxpayers. On
the other hand it does tend to make them secondhand citizens and reduce
their ability to moderate taxes or mandate better means of tax
collection that might enable them to pay taxes. It is, therefore, a
mixed bag.<<
Which was the idea, I believe.

>> A bigger issue is the fact that at present the Senate, i.e.,
the Oligarchy, controls taxation and budgets. Those who remember the
Boston Tea Party with fondness might well take note.<<
No taxation without representation? Again that works if I have a captive
audience.
But I don't. And if the Senate overtaxes the citizens, they have options.
Mostly they leave. So where does this leave us? I'd say trying not to
overtax the citizens.
You should read Polybios. I posted it especially for you.

>>I can also not fail to note the embarrassing spectacle of a consul
trying to drive out this citizen who disagrees with him and exposes the
power structure of which he is a prominent part. Apparently he wishes to
move Nova Roma further in the direction of silencing the critics of
those in power.<<
I think Vedius was irritated that you weren't contributing any thing
constructive anymore to this debate. You had pretty much said what was
needed to be said in your first statement, then your rebuttal. You tend to
get quite shrill when things don't go your way. Repeating your statements
over and over again is fine, look at what Cato was able to accomplish by
doing that.
Repeating whole e-mails though over and over is not the way. It gets on
everybody's nerves.

>> It is a pity that Nova Roma has sunk to such things, I
can only say that I am glad and proud that I did my best to stop the
worst of the present legislation, which greatly degrades our Res publica.>>

Apollonius we are concerned that you do not like it here. And we think you
would be more happier where "a congenially Roman place to pursue Roman
interests" could be created. That is all. Nobody has sunk anywhere. All we
have said if you don't like this recreation, go start one of your own. I
think you would be happier. But if you want to stick it out here which is
admirable and criticize us "Oligarchs" expect us to criticize back.
And when making a statement "which greatly degrades our Res publica"
shouldn't you include "in my opinion?"

>> I am only sorry that I failed.<<
Console yourself with the fact that it wasn't for lack of trying. Remember,
you win and lose. Such is life.

>>But tomorrow is another day.<<
Yes, it is. Looking forward to our next discussion.
Vale
Q. Fabius Maximus.

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: a sad day for Nova Roma
From:	claudius_petrus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 20:16:24 -0000

Consentio Oppius Flaccus Severus!

I am a new cive. I think, even if you have a good point you spoil it
with your yelling.

Te volo en etiam.
Amulius Claudius Petrus

--- In novaroma@--------, "Oppius Flaccus Severus"
<oppiusflaccus@--------> wrote:
> Salve Casce Tiberi;
>
> You probably won't like what I'm about to say either,
> but I'll make it brief:
>
> 1-To say it's hypocritical to accuse others of abandoning
> the virtues when you are shouting at the top of your
> lungs on the Rostra is an understatement. Since I myself
have
> no personal interest in trying to be the 'morals and virtues'
> moderator of Roma's discussions, I will put it to you in
> more 'modern' terms: shouting (i.e. excessive use of the
> CAPS lock key to try to make one's voice heard above the
> rest,) is in most chat and mail venues considered to be the
height
> of rudeness and in many venues will get one moderated or
> removed from the list, flamed or any number of the above.
> (And *no*, I am not suggesting any of these things happen
> to you, but since you're obviously not aware of them you
> may consider it a gentle reminder.)
>
> 2-I will further grant that your use of the capslock key
> will garner your particular post more 'attention' by
> newbies or cives that patrol the archives; but you might
> *also* wish to consider what type of attention that will
> be.
>
> The rest of your post is beyond comment.
>
> -Oppius
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cascus Tiberius Rufio Longinus
[mailto:kminer_rsg@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 10:10 AM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] a sad day for Nova Roma
>
>
> Having just begun to ready through the madness being
posted, I would like to
> make a suggestion to the Senate.
> DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, TO CONTINUE TO LET THIS
CONTINUE IS A DISGRACE TO
> BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED, AND MORE SO TO OUR NATION.
> WHAT IS A NEW CIVE JUST JOINING NR TO THINK WHEN
THE FIRST THING THEY SEE IS
> THIS???
> <snipped>

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Youth in Nova Roma
From:	claudius_petrus@--------
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 19:53:45 -0000

Salve,

Being a new citizen in this nation I may not have a full
understanding of your history yet. Though I am confused with
your idea of not letting youth vote.

Unlike in the original Rome our youth are not born into this
nation. Here they must choose to become part of Nova Roma. In
this act, are they not showing that they care and have OPINIONS
on the Roman mission? Now I think it is foolish to put any voting
restrictions on youth when we have such a small population.

By limiting youth to vote at this time in our history could smother
out the spirit and Nova Roma as a whole in the future. Youth are
the future of this nation. No young person will join if there
opinions are worth a vote in our electoral system.

The solution is simple. Until there are enough youth to actually
make a difference in elections, then there should be no
limitations. By doing this, you will not only preserve the future of
this nation, you will inspire young minds to take part in
something that is educational, develop morals and
understanding of democracy that youth they can actively take part
in.

Amulius Claudius Petrus

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


Subject:	re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 23:13:03 +0200

>I agree that the Senate should be empowered to appoint magistrates to
>fill vacancies; however, I think this should be limited to the junior
>magistracies (excluding Tribune). The offices of Censor, Consul,
>Praetor, and Tribune are powerful and it is important that the
>Comitia be allowed to choose who will fill those offices. Aediles,
>Quaestores, and Vigintisexviri, however, are positions where
>hard work is needed but there is little power, and thus giving
>the Senate power to appoint them will be acceptable to all but
>the most virulent Senate-haters among us.
>
>Vale, Octavius.
>
>--
>M. Octavius Germanicus
>Propraetor, Lacus Magni
>Curator Araneum et Senator

Salve Illustrus Senior Consul!

I think that we must put an end to this. In the future I think that we
should elect a pool of extra "back-up" officials for each office (maybe
called suffecti), but this is only possible when we will have a wealth of
candidates, which we don't have yet. For now I support the suggestion made
by Illustrus Marcus Octavius Germanicus.

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://www.acc.umu.se/~kerish/novaroma/main.html
************************************************
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."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Youth in Nova Roma
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 16:16:34 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Amuli Claudi,

> Unlike in the original Rome our youth are not born into this
> nation. Here they must choose to become part of Nova Roma. In
> this act, are they not showing that they care and have OPINIONS
> on the Roman mission? Now I think it is foolish to put any voting
> restrictions on youth when we have such a small population.

We have to have some sort of objective measure to determine whether
a young citizen can vote.

There are citizens listed in the Album Civium who are as young as
one year old. They were enrolled by their parents, who filled out
the online application and then indicated to the Censores that they
approved of their children joining. These small children do have
email addresses listed; no doubt most of these addresses actually
belong to the parents. If we were to give voter codes to all listed
citizens, regardless of age, these voter codes would, in the case
of many of these children, be sent to the parents' addresses, and
these parents would thus have additional votes.

The only reasonable way to prevent this is to have an objective measure
of when a citizen is presumed old enough to be an independent thinker
who should be able to vote. Right now, this is 18, except for residents
of macronations with a lower age of majority.

I'd support lowering it to sixteen, or fifteen, or whatever the
traditional Roman age of majority was. However, we cannot do away with
age requirements altogether, for then we'd have votes cast on behalf
of babies.

Vale, O.

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

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


Subject:	[novaroma] ADMIN NOTE: List notes
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 17:43:20 -0400

Salve,

I have always made it a habit to contact List members privately when a
concern of List etiquette has arisen. Recently however, there have been
quite a few calls for me to make some form of public statement to the list
at large. Also, some stubbonr few have ignored my private requests.
Therefore, please consider the following to be an "official" set of
"reminders" (for now). Here we go:

1. Trimming posts: it is considered poor form to leave an entire original
post attached (either before or after your own words) when replying. Unless
you are replying to specific statements within the original post, do *not*
include the original in your reply. It is unnecessary, cumbersome and
wastes space.

2. Cutting and pasting: if you wish to reply to specific statements within a
post, please cut and paste ONLY the relevant portion(s). Also, please
clearly delineate the original post from your reply. Some ways to do that
include the use of arrows (>>), the use of separating lines, using initials
or simply saying "response:". Doing this makes your points much more
strongly, as it becomes very clear what you are replying to and who is
saying what.

3. YELLING: it is considered *extremely* rude in *all* cyber circles to make
posts all in CAPS. Doing so is seen as 'screaming' or 'yelling' and is
*never* appropriate here. Please note that doing so here *will* result in
your being contacted by me or one of my scribes for what amounts to
disruptive behavior. Please note that the selective use of CAPS within a
post to simply emphasize a small section is acceptable within the bounds of
good taste.

4. Name-calling/cursing: very simple policy: don't do it. Disagreeing with
someone is perfectly acceptable. Calling them a numbskull, windbag or worse
is *not*. Cursing is likewise *never* acceptable here. Breaking this policy
will most *definitely* result in your being contacted by me or one of my
scribes.

I dearly hope that this little reminder will encourage all members to be
more careful in their posting. I have zero desire to have to start making
more rules/consequences than are absolutely necessary. As I said when I ran
for this job, I believe "less is more". The less I, and my scribes, have to
discipline folks the happier we are. Really, trust me....we *want* to be
bored silly with nothing to do! :)

Thanks in advance for your expected cooperation.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena
Curatrix Sermonis

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 14:50:01 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, Oppi Flacce.

--- Oppius Flaccus Severus <oppiusflaccus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete amice Gai et Omnes;
>
> So you're saying I shouldn't assume office then? :-)
> Well, let's me off the hook quite nicely.

Oh, I didn't mean that, amice. My proposals are simply that: proposals.
Besides, I am very fond of the Roman principle that states that a new
law must not be retroactive; i.e., it must not affect those who "broke"
it before is applied. As long as I am concerned, your position is out
of question. Besides, I voted for you ;-).

>
> My only real comment here is in agreement in accordance
> with the practices in Antiqua. As is my well-known position,
> this should *always* be the *default* whenever possible.
>
> That being said, I fully support the move to have suddenly
> vacated offices appointed by the Senate ***but only in the
> case of the junior magistracies*** as suggested by Senator
> Marcus Octavius. For whatever it's worth (or not,) my vote
> goes in the 'plus' column.

I would like to know if these two paragraphs are mutually exclusive or
not ;-). I pledge our best informed citizens to clarify how these
issues were handled in Roma Antiqua.

>
> Bene valete,
> Oppius (maybe, soon to be Quaestor :-)

You just need to make the Oath of Office, don't you?
I hope you can do that soon ;-).

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2001 00:19:06 +0200

Second sending, have had problems with my Server. Sorry to do this.

>I agree that the Senate should be empowered to appoint magistrates to
>fill vacancies; however, I think this should be limited to the junior
>magistracies (excluding Tribune). The offices of Censor, Consul,
>Praetor, and Tribune are powerful and it is important that the
>Comitia be allowed to choose who will fill those offices. Aediles,
>Quaestores, and Vigintisexviri, however, are positions where
>hard work is needed but there is little power, and thus giving
>the Senate power to appoint them will be acceptable to all but
>the most virulent Senate-haters among us.
>
>Vale, Octavius.
>
>--
>M. Octavius Germanicus
>Propraetor, Lacus Magni
>Curator Araneum et Senator

Salve Illustrus Senior Consul!

I think that we must put an end to this. In the future I think that we
should elect a pool of extra "back-up" officials for each office (maybe
called suffecti), but this is only possible when we will have a wealth of
candidates, which we don't have yet. For now I support the suggestion made
by Illustrus Marcus Octavius Germanicus.

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule
Accensus to Consul Marcus Cassius Julianus

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
Join the Main List for Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma
Join the List for the Thule Provincia in Nova Roma
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ThuleNovaRoma/join
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://www.acc.umu.se/~kerish/novaroma/main.html
************************************************
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."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that don't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10
DOG BOARDING HOUSE PHONE: +90 - 503 56
MOBILE: +70 - 643 88 80

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Youth in Nova Roma
From:	"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 22:04:10 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@c...> wrote:
> Salve Amuli Claudi,
>
> > Unlike in the original Rome our youth are not born into this
> > nation. Here they must choose to become part of Nova Roma. In
> > this act, are they not showing that they care and have OPINIONS
> > on the Roman mission? Now I think it is foolish to put any voting
> > restrictions on youth when we have such a small population.
>
> We have to have some sort of objective measure to determine whether
> a young citizen can vote.
>
> There are citizens listed in the Album Civium who are as young as
> one year old. They were enrolled by their parents, who filled out
> the online application and then indicated to the Censores that they
> approved of their children joining. These small children do have
> email addresses listed; no doubt most of these addresses actually
> belong to the parents. If we were to give voter codes to all listed
> citizens, regardless of age, these voter codes would, in the case
> of many of these children, be sent to the parents' addresses, and
> these parents would thus have additional votes.
>
> The only reasonable way to prevent this is to have an objective measure
> of when a citizen is presumed old enough to be an independent thinker
> who should be able to vote. Right now, this is 18, except for residents
> of macronations with a lower age of majority.
>
> I'd support lowering it to sixteen, or fifteen, or whatever the
> traditional Roman age of majority was. However, we cannot do away with
> age requirements altogether, for then we'd have votes cast on behalf
> of babies.
>
> Vale, O.
>
> ---
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Propraetor, Lacus Magni
> Curator Araneum et Senator

Salve,

16 or 17 depending on the persons age on the Agonalia that occured XV
days before the Kalends of Aprilis (March 17). Children born in 2737
AUC (1984 CE) would have entered adulthood this past March 17th. Those
who's birthdays were between The first day of the Year and The 17th
day of March would have been 17, while the rest would have been 16 on
that date, turning 17 later this year. Children of both sexes would
remove their Bullae on that date and the young men would don the all
white Toga of an adult.

Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Two more suggestions
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 15:17:57 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes.

After reading a few of your last posts, and thinking about them, two
different ideas have come up to my mind:

1.- On the replacing resigning officers issue: I have read the posts of
Quintilianus and others, and they have somewhat broadened my point of
view (after all, that is the point of discussions, isn't it?). Now I
think that having a pool of "suffecti" would be the best solution.
Instead of having them elected, we could draw them from the candidates
who lost the election. Just to make it clear:

a) If an officer resigns, he could be substituted by the candidate who
obtained more votes after him. In that way, we would avoid holding
additional elections, and also requiring additional "safeguards"
candidates.

b) If no candidate was left, and only for the magistratures without
imperium, I would agree with the Senate appointing an individual to
take the office.

c) If a magistrate with imperium resigned and there were not
additional candidates from the last election, a new election should be
held.

2.- On the acceptance of new citizens during elections. I completely
agree with the spirit of this measure; however, we could avoid the
damage this could do to the growth of our Res Publica by accepting new
citizens during Comitia, but not allowing them to vote on those
Comitia.

Of course, these two proposals are subject to extreme modifications,
especially since I am still not sure of how these matters were handled
in Roma Antiqua.

Please, remember that personal disclaimers still apply. These are
simple suggestions, and no double talking is intended.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Youth in Nova Roma
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 15:23:41 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, Druse.

--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:

<<snipped>>

> Salve,
>
> 16 or 17 depending on the persons age on the Agonalia that occured XV
> days before the Kalends of Aprilis (March 17). Children born in 2737
> AUC (1984 CE) would have entered adulthood this past March 17th.
> Those
> who's birthdays were between The first day of the Year and The 17th
> day of March would have been 17, while the rest would have been 16 on
> that date, turning 17 later this year. Children of both sexes would
> remove their Bullae on that date and the young men would don the all
> white Toga of an adult.

Extremely interesting, Druse. I think that, just maybe, we could start
getting rid of the references to Macronational law, and start
reconstructing the original Roman system. I think this is a very good
issue to start with. After all, it would provide us more strength, and
also more aequitas among our different provinciae.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re:Youth in Nova Roma
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 18:25:02 -0400

Yes I agree with the fact that very young children can't vote. Though I do
think we should come up with an age that is lower. By "lower" I mean that
the child could effectivly manage there own email account and have oppinions
that could be seperate then those of the parents. By doing this you could
assure the future of the nation and inspire these people to take part in the
topic we all so enjoy.

Vale

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Civis Canada Orientalis

>
>> Unlike in the original Rome our youth are not born into this
>> nation. Here they must choose to become part of Nova Roma. In
>> this act, are they not showing that they care and have OPINIONS
>> on the Roman mission? Now I think it is foolish to put any voting
>> restrictions on youth when we have such a small population.
>
> We have to have some sort of objective measure to determine whether
> a young citizen can vote.
>
> There are citizens listed in the Album Civium who are as young as
> one year old. They were enrolled by their parents, who filled out
> the online application and then indicated to the Censores that they
> approved of their children joining. These small children do have
> email addresses listed; no doubt most of these addresses actually
> belong to the parents. If we were to give voter codes to all listed
> citizens, regardless of age, these voter codes would, in the case
> of many of these children, be sent to the parents' addresses, and
> these parents would thus have additional votes.
>
> The only reasonable way to prevent this is to have an objective measure
> of when a citizen is presumed old enough to be an independent thinker
> who should be able to vote. Right now, this is 18, except for residents
> of macronations with a lower age of majority.
>
> I'd support lowering it to sixteen, or fifteen, or whatever the
> traditional Roman age of majority was. However, we cannot do away with
> age requirements altogether, for then we'd have votes cast on behalf
> of babies.
>
> Vale, O.
>
> ---
> M. Octavius Germanicus
> Propraetor, Lacus Magni
> Curator Araneum et Senator
>

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Steven - Piparskeggr <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 17:43:09 -0500

Ave,

gcassiusnerva@-------- wrote:
>
> Salvete,
>
> (excise Qu�stor anecdote)
>
> Is this post jinxed?
>
> Gaius Cassius Nerva
>

Doan thin so, meester.

I'm into my third term of service as Qu�stor.

--
=========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives, Paterfamilias, Qu�stor et Legate
My homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
File of my Poems and Songs
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Pip_music/files/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Youth in Nova Roma
From:	"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 22:56:25 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
SNIP
> >
> > 16 or 17 depending on the persons age on the Agonalia that occured XV
> > days before the Kalends of Aprilis (March 17). Children born in 2737
> > AUC (1984 CE) would have entered adulthood this past March 17th.
> > Those
> > who's birthdays were between The first day of the Year and The 17th
> > day of March would have been 17, while the rest would have been 16 on
> > that date, turning 17 later this year. Children of both sexes would
> > remove their Bullae on that date and the young men would don the all
> > white Toga of an adult.
>
> Extremely interesting, Druse. I think that, just maybe, we could start
> getting rid of the references to Macronational law, and start
> reconstructing the original Roman system. I think this is a very good
> issue to start with. After all, it would provide us more strength, and
> also more aequitas among our different provinciae.
>
>
>
> =====
> Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
> Gnaeus Salix Astur.

Salve,

I Agree. It would be reafirming our soverngity by rejecting Macro
National Laws, and at the same time restoring our traditions.

Just think how nice it would be on the next Martius Agonalia if we saw
posts from proud parents informing us that their children were now
adults, The Citizens first posts as Adult members of Nava Roma, Maybe
an annoucement of congratulations from the Consuls, and an annoucement
from the Censors that these Citizens were now listed in the Albae as
Adults, and that voter codes had been mailed to Citizens who were born
in 2738 AUC.

Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Youth in Nova Roma
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 18:39:25 -0400

Acquiesco! I completely agree with you.

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Civis Canada Orientalis

> Extremely interesting, Druse. I think that, just maybe, we could start
> getting rid of the references to Macronational law, and start
> reconstructing the original Roman system. I think this is a very good
> issue to start with. After all, it would provide us more strength, and
> also more aequitas among our different provinciae.

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 16:03:36 -0700 (PDT)

Salve, Honorabilis Quaestor Ulleri Venator.

--- Steven - Piparskeggr <catamount_grange@--------> wrote:
> I'm into my third term of service as Qu�stor.

I just needed to ask you. How do you do the "AE" trick ;-)? Which is
it's ASCII code?

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Youth in Nova Roma
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 16:07:09 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, L. Sicini Druse.

--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> Just think how nice it would be on the next Martius Agonalia if we
> saw
> posts from proud parents informing us that their children were now
> adults, The Citizens first posts as Adult members of Nava Roma, Maybe
> an annoucement of congratulations from the Consuls, and an
> annoucement
> from the Censors that these Citizens were now listed in the Albae as
> Adults, and that voter codes had been mailed to Citizens who were
> born
> in 2738 AUC.
>
> Vale,
> L. Sicinius Drusus

An extremely nice vision. I hope it will come true some day. I believe
this kind of ceremony would do wonders to our common spiritual
well-being, and would be another way of honouring our Gods and our
Maiores.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Favorite Roman books
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 19:19:59 -0400

Salvete,
My list:

M Aurelius - "The Meditations"
Sappho - All (but isn't she Greek?)
Ovidius - All
Petronius - "Satyrica"
Apuleius - "The Golden Ass"
Iuvenalis - "Saturae"
Seneca Minor - "Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium"
Vergilius - "Aeneidos"
Procopius - The Secret History
Josephus - The Jewish War

Shamefully, it's been years since I read some of these

I did read (& still own) Ovid's "Metamorphoses" in Latin. A really long
time ago ....

Valete,
Helena Galeria

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] A Strange Pattern
From:	Steven - Piparskeggr <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 18:42:50 -0500

Ave Gn. Salix!

Gnaeus Salix Astur wrote:
>
> Salve, Honorabilis Quaestor Ulleri Venator.
>
> --- Steven - Piparskeggr <catamount_grange@--------> wrote:
> > I'm into my third term of service as Qu�stor.
>
> I just needed to ask you. How do you do the "AE" trick ;-)? Which is
> it's ASCII code?
>
> =====
> Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
> Gnaeus Salix Astur.
> Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
>

These are a few of the alt character list, within Windows� standard
keyboard encoding. They are done by holding down the ALT key and typing
the numbers on the right hand keypad.

0126 ~ 0127 0128 � 0129 � 0130 �
0131 � 0132 � 0133 � 0134 � 0135 �
and so on,

0198 � 0230 � 0140 � 0156 � et ceteras...

--
=========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives, Paterfamilias, Qu�stor et Legate
My homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
File of my Poems and Songs
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Pip_music/files/

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Youth in Nova Roma
From:	"A. Cato" <a.cato@-------->
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2001 19:59:45 -0400

Salvete Omnes: The topic of youth in Nova Roma I find very interesting as my own thirteen year old son has just applied for citizenship. But as far as lowering the voting age goes, allow me to voice my opinion.

If or when we lower the voting age I believe that we should ask ourselves if a fifteen, sixteen, or seventeen year old has not only the intelligence to understand the issues, but also the wisdom, in order to make an wise decision. Generally, most countries base there minimum voting age at a age when most adults agree that a great majority of the members of that age group have reached a level of wisdom to make decisions of such magnitude.
In Nova Roma, taking the best from the ancient Republic of Rome, we are at the same time making adjustments to rid ouselves of things that were not so good in ancient Rome. I am not suggesting that we should not lower the voting age, just that before we do so, that perhaps we should reach a consensus of what age level that most youth would have, not only the intelligence, but also the wisdom to make decisions that determine the future of Nova Roma.
I agree that there are youth in their early teens who could make such decisions wisely. But most of them? I doubt it. On the other hand there are also some adults who lack the wisdom to make such decisions. But we tolerate that because the great majority of them do have the wisdom.
I would be interested in the thoughts on this matter of one I consider to be one of our wisest citizens, Senator et Qu�stor, Marcus Minucius Audens. I find that whether I agree or disagree when he speaks, that he always speaks with great wisdom. and that is something that one only aquires with years of experience. What say you Senator?
Ave atque vale, ... Appius tullius Marcellus 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/