| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Mercurius cult |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?B?WWFubiBRdely6Q==?= <yquere@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 02:22:25 +0200 |
|
Thanks a lot, I will have a deep look on it
I.Querius Armoricus Lutecio
----- Original Message -----
From: Raina Faolan <GuruPoet@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 8:05 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Mercurius cult
>
>
>
> >From: Yann Quéré <yquere@-------->
> >Reply-To: novaroma@--------
> >To: <novaroma@-------->
> >Subject: [novaroma] Mercurius cult
> >Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 19:32:42 +0200
> >
> >Salvete Omnes,
> >
> >I would be interested in any reference to the Cult of Mercurius or
Hermès,
> >and what would be proper to start organizing a temple and cult facilities
> >and ceremonies.
> >
> >Does any one here can provide me with material references ?
> >Thanks in advance.
> >
> >Bene Valete
> >I.Querius Armoricus Lutecio
>
> Salvete,
>
> The only lists I can really think of that could be of aiding are the
Religio
> Romana and HellenicPagan ran by Andrea Gladia Cyrene, I'll posts links to
> both links, hope this helps a bit.
>
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/ReligioRomana
>
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/HellenicPagan
>
> Vale Bene,
> Aeternia
> >
> >
> >[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/
>
>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Patron Dieities and other updates |
| From: |
"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@--------> |
| Date: |
Thu, 14 Jun 2001 19:33:23 -0700 |
|
Ave,
This is just a remainder to all citizens (in particular those who are
paters/maters) if you would email the patron dieties of the Gentes we can
post them on the Album Gentium. The benefit would be that perspective
citizens will know what dieties your Gens honors. All you need to do is to
fire off an email to the censors and we will take care of posting it.
Also, for all citizens, please send us your information if you have
moved....changed phone number, changed IM information....changed your
name...or basically changed information.
In addition, for all citizens who might not be aware, we do have the
ability to post pics of our citizens. All you need to do is to send the
censors your pic and we will make sure they get posted. You can go to the
Album Gentium and view the pics that have already been posted. The more
pics the better!
Finally, the IM database is availabe for all citizens to use. If your IM is
not listed, please drop the Censors an email and we will add your IM info to
the growing databse.
Respectfully,
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Mercurius cult |
| From: |
"Raina Faolan" <GuruPoet@--------> |
| Date: |
Thu, 14 Jun 2001 22:52:59 -0400 |
|
In addition you may want to look at these sites, I found them on avatar.
http://www.teenwitch.com/DEITY/ROMAN/MERCURY.HTM
http://www.rosacruz.com.br
http://home.pon.net/rhinoceroslodge/thiasos.htm
http://members.xoom.com/Dodekatheon/
--Aeternia
>From: Yann Quéré <yquere@-------->
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: <novaroma@-------->
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] Mercurius cult
>Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 02:22:25 +0200
>
>Thanks a lot, I will have a deep look on it
>
>I.Querius Armoricus Lutecio
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Raina Faolan <GuruPoet@-------->
>To: <novaroma@-------->
>Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 8:05 PM
>Subject: Re: [novaroma] Mercurius cult
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Yann Quéré <yquere@-------->
> > >Reply-To: novaroma@--------
> > >To: <novaroma@-------->
> > >Subject: [novaroma] Mercurius cult
> > >Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 19:32:42 +0200
> > >
> > >Salvete Omnes,
> > >
> > >I would be interested in any reference to the Cult of Mercurius or
>Hermès,
> > >and what would be proper to start organizing a temple and cult
>facilities
> > >and ceremonies.
> > >
> > >Does any one here can provide me with material references ?
> > >Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > >Bene Valete
> > >I.Querius Armoricus Lutecio
> >
> > Salvete,
> >
> > The only lists I can really think of that could be of aiding are the
>Religio
> > Romana and HellenicPagan ran by Andrea Gladia Cyrene, I'll posts links
>to
> > both links, hope this helps a bit.
> >
> > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/ReligioRomana
> >
> > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/HellenicPagan
> >
> > Vale Bene,
> > Aeternia
> > >
> > >
> > >[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/
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
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: |
[novaroma] Gens reform |
| From: |
"Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <lespeterson@--------> |
| Date: |
Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:36:28 -0700 |
|
Salve Gnaes Salix Astur et omnes,
Thank you for your prompt reply to my posts. I appreciate your input, even the ironic parts :) Following are a few quick responses:
1. Freedom of speech
I never implied our citizenry would be silenced. I merely suggested all posts to the main list go through the Gens leadership. This would help our web mistress ensure the appropriateness of posts and would hopefully cut down on posts from bogus cives.
2. Pater/Materfamilias as tax collectors
Not historically accurate, but neither are taxes. Roman cives weren't taxed on a regular basis as we intend to do. My emphasis here was creating an opportunity to get the family heads involved, not historical accuracy.
3. Gens website/ form letter
Remove non-compliant Gens? Not necessary. Allow a reasonable length of time to comply and find measures to encourage compliance. Maybe a tax penalty?
4. Violation of Roman traditions
In all honesty I intended my post as a brainstormer. I didn't consider historical correctness. I did consider the efforts of many of our good cives to energize the vital institution of our Gens. I did not mean to imply that those efforts were concerned with creating "empty titles". It's important to determine how we come about our names, I'm not opposed to that. However, what functions will our Pater/Materfamilias and Gens perform once we have them named? As a vigilant watchdog for Roman tradition, can any of you find a historical role of the Gens and its leadership that we can emulate here and now? Please, if you disagree with my ideas to help Nova Roma, show me how I may be wrong, but follow it with a better idea. Don't just shoot me down and walk away. Let's brainstorm some more, determine the role of the Gens and the Pater/Materfamilias.
Lucius Mauricius Procopious
Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis
(This is an unofficial post for which I assume full responsibility)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
procopious@--------
ICQ# 83516618
*America Boreoccidentalis Mail List
http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves
* The Gens Mauricia
http://www.geocities.com/procopious
"Indeed, it is not by the plans of men, but by the hand of God that the affairs of men are directed; and this men call Fate, not knowing the reason for what things they see occur; and what seems to be without cause is easy to call the accident of chance. Still, this is a matter every mortal will decide for himself according to his taste."
-Procopius of Caesarea (in Palestine) [born c.490/507- died c.560s]
[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: Gens reform |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 04:53:57 -0000 |
|
Salvete Omnes,
This discussion has seen a lot of ideas proposed. I'd like to offer
some more thoughts.
First of all I not intrested in FORCING the Gens into a reform, rather
I think we should start out by identifying areas where where our
current laws interfere with those who WISH to set up thier Gens on
more historic lines. For those who wish to retain the status quo
within thier Gens, that is a matter for the Gens and thier Paters to
work out, and not something the state should FORCE on them.
The inactive Paters is a separate, though related problem, that I
shall discuss in a seperate post.
The first area that I feel we need to improve is having multiple
families within a Gens. Right now the Constituition only recognizes
ONE Pater in a given Gens. All of our Gens are in effect single family
Gens. I think we should make it possible for the Gens that WISH to
organize themselves as multiple family Gens to have multiple Paters,
each of whom would be regestered as a Paterfamilis of that Gens. No
Gens should be FORCED to accept multiple Paters if they don't desire
this at this time. We allready have some Gens that have reached a
large enough size that if they DESIRED to do so they could split into
two families. The Gens Cornelia comes to mind. I would like to see the
laws put into place so if one of these Gens made the choice the legal
framework would allready be in place.
The second area is related to the first, but only concerns the
Patrician Gens. In Antiquita a Patrician Gens would contain both
Patrician and Plebian families. I would like to see us set up our laws
so that any Patrician Gens that WISHED to include both Patrician and
Plebian families would be able to do this. Again there should be no
FORCE involved in this. If a given Patrician Gens wished to contain
only Patrician families, or a single Patrician family, That is a
matter for that Gens to decide, not the state.
The only way I can think of to track this, is that Gens that WISHED to
have multiple families would have to have these families tracked by
Cognomen, and in the case of Patrician Gens that had Plebian families
Patrician Status would be determined by Gens AND Cognomen. Some
Cognomen in that would be Patrician, others would not.
Again I want to stress that I have no desire to FORCE any Gens to
modify it's structure, rather I want to insure that there is no legal
barrier to Gens that WISH to follow the structure that existed during
the Republican era.
Valete
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: M/Paterfamilias Accountability |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 05:31:16 -0000 |
|
Salvete Omnes,
Non-responsive Paters and Maters are a problem that we need to settle
as soon as possible. I can't help but wondering if we have lost some
potential citizens who threw up thier hands in dispair when they had
to keep waiting for thier application to be approved and decided not
to become a citizen. If someone were unlucky enough to select two
inactive Paters in a row, then after three months of waiting they
would be told to try again, and that is very discourging.
The current edictia gives a Pater 45 days to accept or reject an
apllication before the Gens is declaired closed due to an inactive
Pater. I would like to see some changes made here, a far shorter time
to respond, say a week or two. I'm not saying they would have to
DECIDE on letting someone enter thier Gens in this time, I'm saying
that they would have to contact the Censors that they were aware of
the aplication, and it may also be a good idea to require that they
contact the person who is applying to join thier Gens. Let them have
the full 45 days to make a DECESSION on letting the person join, but
far less time to acknowledge that an application had been made. This
would result in a far shorter waiting time for those unfortunate
enough to select a Gens with an inactive Pater.
I would like to add another sugestion to cut down on the problem of
inactive Paters. Section II D 3 of the Constitution states
"Each gens shall, through whatever means it may determine appropriate,
have a paterfamilias (fem. materfamilias) who shall act as the leader
of the gens and speak for it when necessary. The holder of this
position must be registered as such with the censors. The
paterfamilias may, at his or her discretion, expel members of their
gens, or accept new members into it"
Note the part that reads "must be registered as such with the censors"
I think it would be a good idea to require that the Paters have to
register annualy. This would insure that the Censors had more up to
date information for contacting the Paters when someone submitted an
aplication to join a Gens. Failure to comply with the annual
registration would result in loss of Pater status.
Section IV A 1 a of the constitution states the Censors have the power
"To issue those edicta (edicts) necessary to carry out those tasks in
which they are mandated by this Constitution and the law to engage
(such edicts being binding upon themselves as well as others);"
So both of these changes could be handled by Edictia. The second would
clear the Paters who have been inactive for some time, while the first
would take care of any Paters who became inactive during the time
between registrations.
Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Gens reform |
| From: |
"Gaius Marcius Coriolanus" <coriolanus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:19:06 -0000 |
|
Quirites
Lucius Mauricius Procopious wrote:
> Thank you for your prompt reply to my posts. I appreciate your
input, even the ironic parts :) Following are a few quick responses:
>
> 1. Freedom of speech
> I never implied our citizenry would be silenced. I merely suggested
all posts to the main list go through the Gens leadership. This would
help our web mistress ensure the appropriateness of posts and would
hopefully cut down on posts from bogus cives.
GMC:
That's not good idea. Maybe it could really cut down bogus cives
posts, but think of the things that must mater/paterfamilas do.
Paterfamilias can not be online everyday and everytime, so some posts
could be delayed too much to keep the discussion continual.
Better solution is that if you had some suspicion to contact
paterfamilias and censor to approve him/her.
> 2. Pater/Materfamilias as tax collectors
> Not historically accurate, but neither are taxes. Roman cives
weren't taxed on a regular basis as we intend to do. My emphasis here
was creating an opportunity to get the family heads involved, not
historical accuracy.
GMC:
That's even worse idea than the first is. In many cases mebers are
not from one state maybe not from one continent. So why we have to
send money from US to Europe and then back?
Early tax propsals are more comfortable and useful.
> 3. Gens website/ form letter
> Remove non-compliant Gens? Not necessary. Allow a reasonable length
of time to comply and find measures to encourage compliance. Maybe a
tax penalty?
GMC:
I agree that it is not necessary to remove them. I would leave them
alone, and they will comply sometime. If not I'm sure that members
will leave them.
Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
Paterfamilias Gens Marcia
Legatus Pannoniae Inferioris
" CENSER CARTHAGINEM ESSE DELENDAM "
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Gens reform |
| From: |
QFabiusMaxmi@-------- |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 05:48:23 EDT |
|
In a message dated 6/15/2001 1:21:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
lespeterson@-------- writes:
> Salve Lucius Maurikius Prokopious
>
> Thank you for your prompt reply to my posts. I appreciate your input, even
> the ironic parts :) Following are a few quick responses:
>
> 1. Freedom of speech
> I never implied our citizenry would be silenced. I merely suggested all
> posts to the main list go through the Gens leadership. This would help our
> web mistress ensure the appropriateness of posts and would hopefully cut
> down on posts from bogus civvies.
>
The problem with doing this is you run the risk of alienating gensmembers who
might wish to express something different then the Gens "party line."
Patria potestas only works if the head of family is in constant contact with
his extended family, so they all understand why the Gens is operating in such
a fashion.
> 2. Pater/Materfamilias as tax collectors
> Not historically accurate, but neither are taxes. Roman civvies weren't
> taxed on a regular basis as we intend to do. My emphasis here was creating
> an opportunity to get the family heads involved, not historical accuracy.
>
Well, since our legiones are not conquering territories, nor are we
surrounded by enemies that we need to raise troops your analogy falls a bit
short.
Citizens were forced to pay a poll tax, and there were land taxes in the
early republic. The yearly tax or dues are the only because we are not
getting a revenue stream from the slave market.
> 3. Gens website/ form letter
> Remove non-compliant Gens? Not necessary. Allow a reasonable length of time
> to comply and find measures to encourage compliance. Maybe a tax penalty?
>
> 4. Violation of Roman traditions
> I As a vigilant watchdog for Roman tradition, can any of you find a
> historical role of the Gens and its leadership that we can emulate here and
> now? Please, if you disagree with my ideas to help Nova Roma, show me how I
> may be wrong, but follow it with a better idea. Don't just shoot me down
> and walk away. Let's brainstorm some more, determine the role of the Gens
> and the Paterfamilias.
>
The original purpose of our gens was as far as I can tell to allow people who
> identified with a Nomen to be part of that nomen's gens. While this makes
> for an interesting composition of people, you rarely see them face to face.
>
I'd much rather that they all be concentrated around me so as Paterfamilias,
I could
hold gatherings and outings. Since that is not possible, I try to
communicate with my various Gens members through electronic communication.
The Fabii have their own special deities and patrons. While not everybody's
Gens has done this, I thought as Paterfamilias it was important that some
traditions be maintained.
> Valete
> Q. Fabius Maximus
[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: Gens restructuring |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:32:38 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
SNIP
>
> > Lucius Sicinius Drusus wrote:
> >
> > There really wasn't any benefit in belonging to a
> > Gens other than it
> > symbolized your place in society. The Family was
> > far more important.
> >
> >
SNIP
>
> The Gens had several functions in Classical Rome. A certain Gens had
> its specific patron deities, its own history and legend, its own
burial
> mound, its own internal rules, its own firstnames, its own manes,
its
> own customs, its own preferences. To belong to a certain Gens marked
> much of the way in which a civis viewed the world: the pride of the
> Claudii was legendary, as well as the austerity of the Quintii. A
> Cassius would probably bend to the needs of the Plebs, while a
Manlius
> would always support the Patricians.
>
> I see no reason why we shouldn't stick to Roman tradition on this.
Some
> gentes are already (unconsciously or not) following this guidelines.
>
Salve,
The Family had inhierited allmot all the functions that a Gens had in
earlier times. The older families within a Gens would indeed maintain
the customs of the Gens, but this was NOT true of newer families
formed from freedmen and naturalized citizens. They rarely had access
to the burial areas that now belonged to the older families, they
often worshiped the Gods of thier ancestral homelands rather than the
Gods of the Gens that the older families worshiped.
Romans were VERY conservative when it came to family traditions, so
yes the older families maintained the traditions of the Gens, but
they did so as families. The newer families had changed the overall
nature of the Gens by maintaining some of the traditions of thier
families separtly from that of the older families.
Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Slaves (was RE: Gens reform) |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 08:38:15 -0400 |
|
Salvete
> -----Original Message-----
> From: QFabiusMaxmi@-------- [mailto:QFabiusMaxmi@--------]
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 5:48 AM
>
> The yearly tax or dues are the only because we are not
> getting a revenue stream from the slave market.
That does open up all sorts of interesting possibilities, though. Thusfar,
we've concentrated our energies in the pagan and Roman history communities.
Now, if we were to expand our recruiting efforts into the "lifestyle D/S"
community, we might be able to get that alternative revenue stream going...
;-)
Valete,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Coin Gush |
| From: |
ksterne@-------- |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 13:17:30 -0000 |
|
Salvete,
My coin order arrived Tuesday (I've been out of town) and they are
absolutely terrific! Both of my girls begged for one, and my wife
(who has no real interest in Rome) also asked for one. I've taken to
carrying one in my pocket and asking myself "What would a Roman of
the Romans do in this situation?"
Much thanks (multus gratia???) Marcus Cassius for his inspiration,
time, creative talents, and money in creating this tangible evidence
of Nova Roma. I urge everyone to check them out. They are
fantastic.
Valete,
Gaius Popillius Laenas
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Consular Edictum: Resignation of Offices |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:23:16 -0400 |
|
Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.
Pending passage of a lex and/or Senatus Consultum covering the subject of
the resignations of magistrates and other officials of Nova Roma, this
edictum is hereby issued.
-----
CONSULAR EDICTUM ON THE RESIGNATION OF OFFICES
I. The taking up of an office, elected or appointed, within Nova Roma is a
commitment to the Republic as a whole. It is expected that, barring the most
severe personal or political circumstances, anyone holding such an office
shall do so through the completion of its regular term, to the best of his
or her ability. Consequently, any resignation of such an office is not a
matter to be done to "make a statement" or out of pique. Rumination of such
actions should take place before any action is taken, not after.
II. When any office-holder, whether elected or appointed to their office,
announces either in public or through whatever private communications may be
appropriate (i.e., by informing the Senate, informing the official who
appointed the person in question, etc.), such resignations shall be
considered immediately effective, with no period of grace or
reconsideration.
III. Any person resigning an office who should subsequently wish to return
to that office must go through the same process as any other prospective
candidate, and no institutional preference will be given to such persons in
the process of filling the office.
IV. This edictum is effective immediately, as of the 15th day of the month
of June, 2001 AD, and is not retroactive to any resignations which may have
taken place prior to this date. It is also not effective in regards to any
institution which may already have in place rules regarding the regulation
of resignations.
-----
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] Re: The Gens (long) |
| From: |
labienus@-------- |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:07:11 -0000 |
|
Salvete L Sicini omnesque
> 9. The right to elect the chief and to depose him is nowhere
> mentioned. But since in the earliest days of Rome all offices were
> filled by election or nomination, from the elected king downwards,
> and since the priests of the curiae were also elected by the curiae
> themselves, we may assume the same procedure for the presidents
> (Incises) of the gentes however firmly established the election from
> one and the same family within the gens may have already become.
Do you have any further information or could you point me to sources
for further study about this? From what I've read, the gens did not
have a president, so my curiosity is piqued by Engels' assertion
here. It may be that we could slightly alter the role of our current
patresfamilias to allow them to function as such a president,
allowing current patresfamilias to retain some control over the
growth of their gentes as a whole while satisfying our desire to
conform with historical practice.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: The Gens (long) |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:36:46 -0000 |
|
--- In novaroma@--------, labienus@t... wrote:
> Salvete L Sicini omnesque
>
> > 9. The right to elect the chief and to depose him is nowhere
> > mentioned. But since in the earliest days of Rome all offices
were
> > filled by election or nomination, from the elected king
downwards,
> > and since the priests of the curiae were also elected by the
curiae
> > themselves, we may assume the same procedure for the presidents
> > (Incises) of the gentes however firmly established the election
from
> > one and the same family within the gens may have already become.
>
> Do you have any further information or could you point me to
sources
> for further study about this? From what I've read, the gens did
not
> have a president, so my curiosity is piqued by Engels' assertion
> here. It may be that we could slightly alter the role of our
current
> patresfamilias to allow them to function as such a president,
> allowing current patresfamilias to retain some control over the
> growth of their gentes as a whole while satisfying our desire to
> conform with historical practice.
>
> Valete
> T Labienus Fortunatus
Salve,
I've never seen this idea from anyone other than Engels. As he stated
there is no mention of it in any of the ancient sources. He is simply
infering the idea from other policital structures of the time. IF
there was an elective process for the head of the Gens I would think
that the selection would be limited to the senior most mwmbers of the
Gens who would appoint one of themselves as the replacement for a
Incises who had died. I do think that if this process took place it
would be an apointment for life, not for any term.
Vale,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Gens reform |
| From: |
"Lucius Mauricius Procopious" <lespeterson@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:33:43 -0700 |
|
Salve,
Again I thank several of you for your responses to my suggestions. However, I didn't see many constructive counter proposals. If you disagree with my ideas, what are yours? How would you describe the "present" role of the Gens and its leadership? Quite frankly I've had enough lectures about what was or was not the historical practice. Tell me how we should adapt those practices to present day. I read from one of you that one of the ancient functions of a Gens was the maintenance of a burial plot. Are you suggesting that that should be one of the present functions of the Gens? I eagerly await the more authentic suggestions from those of you more knowledgeable than I. What is the function of the Gens and its leadership? Whether legislated or custom, how would we explain these institutions, as they exist now, to a newcomer?
Lucius Mauricius Procopious
Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis
(This is an unofficial post for which I assume full responsibility)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
procopious@--------
ICQ# 83516618
*America Boreoccidentalis Mail List
http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves
* The Gens Mauricia
http://www.geocities.com/procopious
"Indeed, it is not by the plans of men, but by the hand of God that the affairs of men are directed; and this men call Fate, not knowing the reason for what things they see occur; and what seems to be without cause is easy to call the accident of chance. Still, this is a matter every mortal will decide for himself according to his taste."
-Procopius of Caesarea (in Palestine) [born c.490/507- died c.560s]
[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] Reenactment |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@-------- |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:13:36 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Honored Consul, and Nova Romans;
For those of you who may be interested, I will b attending a Rev War
Reenactment at Wayne, NJ this weekend, in the Dye Mansion Historical
Park, Saturday (10:00 A.M. through 4:00 P.M.) and Sunday (10:00 A.M.)
through 3:00 P.M..
Skirmishes (tacticals) are planned for both days just after the noon
meal, with artillery firing, marching drill period cooking, and a nice
camp set-up with tours of the Dye Mansion.
For those who might wish to stop by, I will be with the 42nd Highland
Regiment. Just ask for the "Adjutant"--everyone knows me----too well!!!
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] Consular Edictum: Resignation from Offices (Addendum) |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:42:59 -0400 |
|
Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.
The Consular Edictum on the Resignation Of Offices is hereby amended to
include the following (and thanks to Quintus Iulius Camillus Caesar for
pointing out the omission):
V. A resignation of Citizenship shall also be considered to be a de facto
resignation from all offices, appointed and/or elected, which the individual
may have held at the time, whether or not such resignation from offices is
explicitly made. Should an individual rescind his or her resignation of
Citizenship as allowed by law, such an action shall not apply to their de
facto resignation of office, and the provisions of this edictum shall apply
in full.
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: |
Re: [novaroma] Gens reform |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:12:07 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve, L. Maurici Procopi.
--- Lucius Mauricius Procopious <lespeterson@--------> wrote:
> Salve Gnaes Salix Astur et omnes,
>
> Thank you for your prompt reply to my posts. I appreciate your input,
> even the ironic parts :) Following are a few quick responses:
And thank you for seeing the lighter side of my post ;-).
> 1. Freedom of speech
> I never implied our citizenry would be silenced. I merely suggested
> all posts to the main list go through the Gens leadership. This would
> help our web mistress ensure the appropriateness of posts and would
> hopefully cut down on posts from bogus cives.
It would, but at an unacceptable cost. I am afraid we can not agree on
this point.
> 2. Pater/Materfamilias as tax collectors
> Not historically accurate, but neither are taxes. Roman cives weren't
> taxed on a regular basis as we intend to do. My emphasis here was
> creating an opportunity to get the family heads involved, not
> historical accuracy.
As someone else already said, taxes did exist in Roman times. However,
if you want to improve the importance of the gentes, I think that a
payment system based on gentes is not the way to go. It would be more
complicated, more unfair, and would apport very little to our Res
Publica and to the gentes involved.
I applaud your intention of having more active gentes, but I think this
activity should not be forced. It should be encouraged, but not made
mandatory. If your gens (or any certain gens) wants to pay taxes as a
whole, I have nothing against it. But it should not be a mandatory
rule.
> 3. Gens website/ form letter
> Remove non-compliant Gens? Not necessary. Allow a reasonable length
> of time to comply and find measures to encourage compliance. Maybe a
> tax penalty?
Well, if the problem is unactive head of gentes, who probably are not
much more active as citizens, I guess that a tax penalty would not have
much effect, as they probably won't pay taxes anyway.
If you really want those gentes to improve their level of
participation, maybe it would be easier (and more effective) to make
them open gentes for new applicants, and to allow them to form their
own familiae within those gentes. In that way, we could have new active
paterfamilias in those gentes.
> 4. Violation of Roman traditions
> In all honesty I intended my post as a brainstormer. I didn't
> consider historical correctness. I did consider the efforts of many
> of our good cives to energize the vital institution of our Gens. I
> did not mean to imply that those efforts were concerned with creating
> "empty titles". It's important to determine how we come about our
> names, I'm not opposed to that. However, what functions will our
> Pater/Materfamilias and Gens perform once we have them named?
My suggestion would be that paterfamilias would have all the rights and
duties they had in ancient Roma. They would be allowed to "adopt" new
citizens into their familiae, making them a main source of acceptance
of new citizens. They would handle their familiar religious rites. They
would give access to minors to citizenship, deciding when they are apt
to become full citizens (at 17 or at 18). They would do hardly
everything our current gens leaders can do.
As for incises (according to Engels) or capites gentium (head of
gentes), they would be patres and matres of their own familiae. Maybe
they could be the ones who decided whether to accept new familiae in a
gens (remember this is just a suggestion).
> As a vigilant watchdog for Roman tradition, can any of you find a
> historical role of the Gens and its leadership that we can emulate
> here and now?
I liked the term "vigilant watchdog for Roman tradition"; I will
consider including it in my signatrure ;-).
The historical leadership of gentes was not based on laws or edicts,
but more on personal relations, customs and contacts. I think that both
the gens Cornelia and the gens Apollonia have some things in common
(good things, of course) with some gentes of ancient time, safe by the
fact that they don't have different familiae in them. You could look at
these two as examples, althoug obviously not all gentes had this level
of involvement. Others were like gens Salicia; less evident though
strong ties did in fact exist between their members. And finally others
were like our inactive gentes, being merely a collection of familiae
that shared a common nomen.
> Please, if you disagree with my ideas to help Nova
> Roma, show me how I may be wrong, but follow it with a better idea.
> Don't just shoot me down and walk away. Let's brainstorm some more,
> determine the role of the Gens and the Pater/Materfamilias.
I understand and respect your position, although I do not share many of
your points. I have tried to be more "constructive" on this occassion.
I have merely suggested things that I or others already pointed in the
past, but maybe we all will benefit with some repetition.
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Gens reform |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:23:19 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete omnes; and salve, L. Sicini Druse.
--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
>
> This discussion has seen a lot of ideas proposed. I'd like to offer
> some more thoughts.
Once more, I have to say that your words seem to express what I have in
mind better than my own. I agree wholeheartedly with almost everything.
I have a few comments, though.
> First of all I not intrested in FORCING the Gens into a reform,
> rather
> I think we should start out by identifying areas where where our
> current laws interfere with those who WISH to set up thier Gens on
> more historic lines. For those who wish to retain the status quo
> within thier Gens, that is a matter for the Gens and thier Paters to
> work out, and not something the state should FORCE on them.
I agree. If the members of a particular gens feel happier belonging to
a single familia, so be it. According to the historical system, the
approbation of a paterfamilias would be necessary for a citizen to
found a new familia within a gens. Gentes will not be automatically
divided against the will of their members under no cirumstance.
> The first area that I feel we need to improve is having multiple
> families within a Gens. Right now the Constituition only recognizes
> ONE Pater in a given Gens. All of our Gens are in effect single
> family
> Gens. I think we should make it possible for the Gens that WISH to
> organize themselves as multiple family Gens to have multiple Paters,
> each of whom would be regestered as a Paterfamilis of that Gens. No
> Gens should be FORCED to accept multiple Paters if they don't desire
> this at this time. We allready have some Gens that have reached a
> large enough size that if they DESIRED to do so they could split into
> two families. The Gens Cornelia comes to mind. I would like to see
> the
> laws put into place so if one of these Gens made the choice the legal
> framework would allready be in place.
>
> The second area is related to the first, but only concerns the
> Patrician Gens. In Antiquita a Patrician Gens would contain both
> Patrician and Plebian families. I would like to see us set up our
> laws
> so that any Patrician Gens that WISHED to include both Patrician and
> Plebian families would be able to do this. Again there should be no
> FORCE involved in this. If a given Patrician Gens wished to contain
> only Patrician families, or a single Patrician family, That is a
> matter for that Gens to decide, not the state.
>
> The only way I can think of to track this, is that Gens that WISHED
> to
> have multiple families would have to have these families tracked by
> Cognomen, and in the case of Patrician Gens that had Plebian families
> Patrician Status would be determined by Gens AND Cognomen. Some
> Cognomen in that would be Patrician, others would not.
>
> Again I want to stress that I have no desire to FORCE any Gens to
> modify it's structure, rather I want to insure that there is no legal
> barrier to Gens that WISH to follow the structure that existed during
> the Republican era.
What can I say; I agree with everything. However, I would like to point
out a minor issue. Even if a gens kept a single paterfamilias, it
should be considered (both for historical reasons and to be coherent
with other gentes) to be a familia as well. As cognomina served to
differenciate familiae within the same gens, two possibilities come to
mind:
1.- The members of such a gens would not have a cognomen at all (as
there would not be a need to differenciate between familiae). Their
current cognomina should be considered agnomina.
2.- If that gens has prospects to form several familiae in the future,
then gens members should have the same cognomen, to indicate they
belong to the same familia.
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: M/Paterfamilias Accountability |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:27:08 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve, L. Sicini Druse.
--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
>
> Non-responsive Paters and Maters are a problem that we need to settle
> as soon as possible. I can't help but wondering if we have lost some
> potential citizens who threw up thier hands in dispair when they had
> to keep waiting for thier application to be approved and decided not
> to become a citizen. If someone were unlucky enough to select two
> inactive Paters in a row, then after three months of waiting they
> would be told to try again, and that is very discourging.
>
> The current edictia gives a Pater 45 days to accept or reject an
> apllication before the Gens is declaired closed due to an inactive
> Pater. I would like to see some changes made here, a far shorter time
> to respond, say a week or two. I'm not saying they would have to
> DECIDE on letting someone enter thier Gens in this time, I'm saying
> that they would have to contact the Censors that they were aware of
> the aplication, and it may also be a good idea to require that they
> contact the person who is applying to join thier Gens. Let them have
> the full 45 days to make a DECESSION on letting the person join, but
> far less time to acknowledge that an application had been made. This
> would result in a far shorter waiting time for those unfortunate
> enough to select a Gens with an inactive Pater.
As usual, an extremely good suggestion. I subscribe it.
> I would like to add another sugestion to cut down on the problem of
> inactive Paters. Section II D 3 of the Constitution states
>
> "Each gens shall, through whatever means it may determine
> appropriate,
> have a paterfamilias (fem. materfamilias) who shall act as the
> leader
> of the gens and speak for it when necessary. The holder of this
> position must be registered as such with the censors. The
> paterfamilias may, at his or her discretion, expel members of their
> gens, or accept new members into it"
>
> Note the part that reads "must be registered as such with the
> censors"
> I think it would be a good idea to require that the Paters have to
> register annualy. This would insure that the Censors had more up to
> date information for contacting the Paters when someone submitted an
> aplication to join a Gens. Failure to comply with the annual
> registration would result in loss of Pater status.
I don't think this is necessary, however. Maybe a pater/mater should
loose their title in favour of other member of their gens (or familia)
if they did not respond to, say, three calls for contact from the
censores. This would reduce much innecessary fuss.
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Gens restructuring |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:04:29 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve, L. Sicini Druse.
--- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
> SNIP
> >
> > > Lucius Sicinius Drusus wrote:
> > >
> > > There really wasn't any benefit in belonging to a
> > > Gens other than it
> > > symbolized your place in society. The Family was
> > > far more important.
> > >
> > >
> SNIP
> >
> > The Gens had several functions in Classical Rome. A certain Gens
> had
> > its specific patron deities, its own history and legend, its own
> burial
> > mound, its own internal rules, its own firstnames, its own manes,
> its
> > own customs, its own preferences. To belong to a certain Gens
> marked
> > much of the way in which a civis viewed the world: the pride of the
> > Claudii was legendary, as well as the austerity of the Quintii. A
> > Cassius would probably bend to the needs of the Plebs, while a
> Manlius
> > would always support the Patricians.
> >
> > I see no reason why we shouldn't stick to Roman tradition on this.
> Some
> > gentes are already (unconsciously or not) following this
> guidelines.
> >
> Salve,
>
> The Family had inhierited allmot all the functions that a Gens had in
>
> earlier times. The older families within a Gens would indeed maintain
>
> the customs of the Gens, but this was NOT true of newer families
> formed from freedmen and naturalized citizens. They rarely had access
>
> to the burial areas that now belonged to the older families, they
> often worshiped the Gods of thier ancestral homelands rather than the
>
> Gods of the Gens that the older families worshiped.
>
> Romans were VERY conservative when it came to family traditions, so
> yes the older families maintained the traditions of the Gens, but
> they did so as families. The newer families had changed the overall
> nature of the Gens by maintaining some of the traditions of thier
> families separtly from that of the older families.
You are right. But I think this, in Nova Roma, should depend on the
will of the particular gentes and cives. If a certain NR gens decides
to be a little less conservative than its spiritual ancestors and
allows new familiae of that gens to participate in their gentile
customs, I would certainly not oppose it.
I agree with your previous suggestion that our law should simply leave
room for gentes to decide to follow the historical path if that is
their wish, without forcing anyone to do something they feel
unacceptable.
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Slaves (was RE: Gens reform) |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:06:17 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salvete omnes; et salve, Consul Germanice.
--- Flavius Vedius Germanicus <germanicus@--------> wrote:
<<snipped>>
> Now, if we were to expand our recruiting efforts into the "lifestyle
> D/S"
> community, we might be able to get that alternative revenue stream
> going...
> ;-)
I beg your pardon, but... What does "lifestyle D/S" mean?
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Consular Edictum: Resignation from Offices (Addendum) |
| From: |
Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:11:48 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Gn. Salix Astur consuli F. Vedio Germanico S.P.D.
--- Flavius Vedius Germanicus <germanicus@--------> wrote:
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.
>
> The Consular Edictum on the Resignation Of Offices is hereby amended
> to
> include the following (and thanks to Quintus Iulius Camillus Caesar
> for
> pointing out the omission):
<<snipped>>
I think I can get your point; you want to make resignation from offices
a serious issue, and not one taken lightly. However, I think that a
"cooling-off" time could be a good idea; it has proved effective (and
saved much trouble) in the past, so, why not keep it here as well?
=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Re: Tribal leaders of Trajanic era |
| From: |
"Nick Puglia" <nickpuglia@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:31:12 -0000 |
|
Salve,
I found the following website which is a chronological listing of
Parthian rulers. I hope it helps.
http://www.parthia.com/parthia_chrono.htm
A. Tarquinius Etruscus
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Asellina's Caupona |
| From: |
"Lucius Equitius" <vze23hw7@--------> |
| Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:40:55 -0400 |
|
Salvete,
I hope that everyone is enjoying a return of warmer weather with health and time to make full use of it.
I would like everyone to take a minute to stop by
Asellina's Caupona
http://www.geocities.com/richsc53/
At Roman Days this past weekend the caupona was opened for the first time.
It was a wonderful addition to the event and it will likely be at most if not all future
Legio XX events.
Di deaeque te ament.
Valete, Lucius Equitius
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
