Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rome - Byzantium
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:08:15 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, QFabiusMaxmi@a... wrote:
> Salvete,
> As a member of Dumbarton Oaks I love to talk about the Byzantines.
My MA is
> on their warfare.
> However even though many of their historians call themselves New
Rome and the
> Byzantines themselves call themselves Romans, they are not.
> Diocletianus Dominate spelt the end of the Rome in my opinion.
>
> Offices were purchased, the Senate had no real power at all,
becoming more a
> training ground for legio officers since education was only given
to the
> rich, and the elite became more aristocratic. The original Roman
Gods fell
> by the wayside.
>
> After the fall of the West, a Romo-Grecio-Persian hybrid rose in
the East.
> They spoke a latin/greek/persian/germanic patois. While the court
language
> remained
> Latin, is was the Latin of the commoners, not classical.
>
> Christianity was the religio and no other was tolerated. Any
heresy was
> stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
> The games were stopped. Only chariot racing remained and that was
> discontinued in the 900s.
> The virtues disappeared. Greed and deception were treasured as
great
> attributes.
> The military rather use stratagems to fight their battles, while
this was
> sensible, it would have
> noble, honest classical Roman Generals turning over in their
graves.
>
> Byzantium was important. It helped preserve Roman culture and
writings so we
> can read about it to today. It acted as the block to keep Europe
from being
> overrun by barbaric invasions, allowing the embryonic cultures to
develop,
> and grow strong so when Byzantium
> declined it was no longer needed. Russia, Serbia, Hungry all
assumed
> elements of their culture. It acted as a beacon of civilization
that could
> trace its roots to the classical times, but as Rome continued, no
it was not.
> My old Professor Fr. Wasko used to say the church carried on the
Empire. I
> used to laugh in his face and say no it did not. It helped destroy
it.
>
> Valete
> Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
Salvete!

Thank you for an interesting and thought-provoking response. Is there
a particular date that you would choose as the demarcation point for
the end of the Classical Roman Empire, or would you consider it more
of a gradual process?

Valete,

R Palaeologus





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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Main List Content;
From:	Maximina Octavia <myownq@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:48:31 -0700 (PDT)

Julilla Sempronia Magna <julilla@--------> wrote:


@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| http://julilla.tripod.com/
Daily Life in Ancient Rome
@____@ julilla@--------
||||

What a delight! As I do to your wisdom, my dear! Let's all rise to
the challenge of balancing our passions, and listening as much as we
speak! Gratias for your day-brightening post; I am off to sign up for
Religio Romana; I suppose I can put off working for my clients yet
again....


Ave, Iullia,

We need you more. I have a lot of committments as well. It seems like a several billion projects. Some even Roman! LOL Do you have any idea, how few women post to this list? Come on now, I know you have a lot to share here.

Pompeia Antonia Caesar (and I think I can speak for her as she volunteers me for things {lol}), is extremely intelligent and contributes very logical and down to earth insight to this list. We would like to see you here more.

I am learning as fast as I can, but I am spread to thin to really make an educated historical post. I am certain you know more than I do.

Hope we see more of you here! Your clients will just have to share you!

Vale, Maximina





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] Re: Finding !
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:11:40 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, manius_constantinus_serapio@h... wrote:
> AVETE
>
> the official site of the excavations for the roman port in Pisa
is:
>
> www.navipisa.it
>
> There are also the english and the french version.
>
> VALETE MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO


Thanks for the information - I'll go check the site out shortly!

Valete,

R Palaeologvs





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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rome - Byzantium
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:14:58 -0000

> > Salwete, Gnae! (Hope I got that right!)
>
> Well, yes; more or less. There are several schools of thought on
that
> issue ;-).
>
Thanks - I gave it my best shot!
>
> > > In my humble opinion, the
> > > Byzantine Empire would be one of the two offsprings of the Roman
> > > civilization. The other would be Western Christiandom, and the
> > > various
> > > Germanic-Roman kingdoms that took the place of the Roman Empire
in
> > > the
> > > West.
> >
> > At what point do you make the 'cut-off'? Based on this statement,
the
> > crowning of Charlemagne may be a good point at which to make the
> > Roman/Byzantine distinction. The Gothic kings of Italy still paid
> > tribute to the Emperor in Byzantium and accepted the status of
his
> > vassals for quite some time, but with Charlemagne, there was a
clear
> > break from that. To me, that makes more sense than the conquest
of
> > Rome by Theodoric.
>
> The crowning of Charlemagne as Roman Emperor was an important point
in
> history (although Charlemagne himself would have argued on that),
> because it linked the new Germanic kingdoms with the ancient Roman
> Empire on a theorical level. Since then, and for many years, the
dream
> of many European monarchs was to reestablish the Roman Empire (more
or
> less what we are trying to do here ;-) ).
>
> However, there were already divisions between the East and the West
> before that. For example, the Visigoths of Spain successfully drew
the
> Byzantines out of the Baetica in the 7th century.
>
> <<snipped>>
>
> > Thank you very much for your thoughtful, intelligent response,
friend
> > Gnaeus!
>
> You are extremely welcome. And thank you for bringing such an
> interesting topic into discussion.
>
Thoughtful and intelligent responses like this, good Gnaeus, makes it
my pleasure and privilege, indeed! Thanks again!

Valete,

R Palaeologvs





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

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Tax payer numbers
From:	Maximina Octavia <myownq@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:14:06 -0700 (PDT)

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amulius Claudius Petrus [mailto:pkkt@--------]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:06 AM
>
> I see. Although would it not be easier to send all payments directly to
the
> Quaestores, bypassing the publicani? It seems unnecessary for citizens to
> send there payments to there local publicani then for him/her to send it
to
> the Quaestores.
>
> I am curious to hear what you think the benefits are in having publicani.

They were included because of the objections of some cives in Europe and
South America who did not have credit cards, and who were leery of the
prospect of paying the relatively large fund-transfer fees between
themselves and America. By having the Publicani collect the funds locally
from cives without credit cards, and then transfer them all in one lump sum,
we minimize the fund transfer fees that would have to be paid (although
ideally the publicani would themselves have credit cards, and would be able
to transfer their collected monies that way, eliminating the problem
altogether).

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul


Salvete,

Can the Publicani or anyone who is in charge of collecting funds for Nova Roma open a PayPal double signatory account? Maybe you already have this in mind or are doing this.

It is standard banking practice to always have monies in double custody. Hence, making it more difficult to embezzle.

Doesn't PayPal accept monies worldwide and do the conversion as any bank would do for an international transfer of funds from one bank to another? If not, who does this?

I think the point is keeping the actual physical monies out of the hands of just one party and keeping it on paper or in a computer by means of transfer.

And what about a Swiss account for Nova Roma? Are there any advantages to this?

Just wondering. Please reply as I would like to know more about how the monies would be handled. Thank you.

Valete, Maximina



[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] Re: Tax Concerns
From:	PompeiaAntoniaCaesar <europamoon7@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:43:32 -0700 (PDT)

-
Ave,

I don't know of any non-profits that ask their members
for a $5.00 donation for dues. I don't think they
would waste their time for this pitiful amount. I
belong to two local non-profits that have maybe 200
members each and they ask for $25.00 and $35.00 yearly
dues. Why should we shortchange ourselves by asking
for less than anybody else? Are we not as good as any
other organization? Those that don't want to pay or
only want to pay %5.00 must not think so.

Vale,

Pompeia Antonia Caesar





-- Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, Amulius Claudius
Petruskkt@--------> wrote:
Lucius Sicinius Drusus at lsicinius@-------- wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Salvete Domna Claudia et Omnes,
> > >
> > > Regarding the Citizens who "w/could not pay".
> For those who can pay a
> > > fair and very low tax, but refuse to do so, They
> can take thier place
> > > in the head count or resign thier citizenship as
> far as I'm concerned.
> > > I'm sure that these citizens won't be so
> hesitant to accept any
> > > benifits that are derived from the taxes that
> others pay. These people
> > > are nothing but freeloaders, and thier
> resignation will be no great
> > > loss to our Res Publica.
> > >
> > > As to those who can't pay, there are a great
> many things that I would
> > > like to have, but lack the money. I want a 1969
> Corvette Stingray with
> > > the ZL1 engine. Only two of these were produced.
> The low numbers make
> > > it impossible to do more than estimate thier
> value, but it is in the
> > > million dollar range. Nova Roma Citizenship is
> like that Corvette,
> > > it's something that some may want but can't
> afford. In that case I'm
> > > afraid they will have to do the same as I'm
> doing with the ZL1
> > > Corvette. WITHOUT. Just because you want
> something does NOT mean that
> > > you are entittled to it. Yet we are being more
> than fair with those
> > > who can't pay the Tributum. We are allowing them
> to remain citizens.
> > > We are only saying that thier voice in Nova
> Roma's affairs will not be
> > > as great as those who actually are paying the
> Bills.
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > Lucius, we should try to make a tax that works for
> every citizen
> because we
> > will make more money! The unset tax will still
> raise more money in
> the long
> > run even with a minimum of $5.00. Here is a
> updated version of my
> unset tax
> > idea that will make the proposal even more
> efficient.
>
> DRUSUS: $5.00 is at or below the break even point
> for the ammount of
> effort involved. Records have to be kept that a
> citizen paid his/her
> tax. The Data bases for the Centuries and the tribes
> have to be
> updated. Records have to be kept of how much each
> Provincia paid. When
> some checks bounce (This will happen) everything has
> to be done over.
> That's a lot of effort expended over $5.00. We want
> to come out ahead
> on this, not just break even so the Minimum tax has
> to be at least
> $10.00, and better yet the $12.00 that is being
> discussed.
>
> Look at our current system of donations only as an
> unset tax with a
> zero dollar minimum payment. The vast majority of
> our citizens are
> paying that zero dollar minnimum. If we raise the
> minimum to $5.00,
> the vast majority who pay thier taxes will opt for
> the least ammount
> they can pay, so we will see a lot of $5.00 payments
> and few larger
> ones. That's just basic human nature. you can try a
> reward system, but
> I fear that only our most active citizens will be
> intrested in
> additional Century points if they have to pay for
> them.
>
> I Also hope that most of our citizens aren't too
> commited to the idea
> that half of the allmost 1000 citizens will pay
> thier taxes. Based on
> the numbers who vote, the number of subscribers to
> the mainlist, and
> allowing for some who are avoid this list because of
> the ammount of
> politics, we may have around 500 to 600 citizens who
> are active in
> some area of Nova Roma. All of these won't pay, and
> I'll be surprised
> if we have as many as 400 taxpayers. Of this 400
> about 3/4 will opt
> for the least ammount they can pay, be it $5.00 or
> $12.00. The
> remainder will not make up the loss in revenue if
> the minimum is set
> at $5.00. They would have to pay three times the
> $7.00 difference, or
> $21.00 in addition to the $12.00 or $33.00 on
> average.
>
> Vale,
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Expansion and Taxes
From:	"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 03:52:45 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@n...> wrote:
> Salvete
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Fro--------ohn M. Osborne [--------to:john@--------]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:45 AM
> >
> > I realize that Nova Roma is founded, and primarily attainable, in the
> > meta-world of the Internet. Rather than focusing on that, though, we
> > should be looking to the outlying communities for expansion
membership.
> > I am a member of the SCA as well, and we actively search out new
> > members. This is done through public performances, oration, education
> > programs, and varying outreach. One of the requirements of our
priests
> > (in NR) is that they perform and establish local ritual and
> > temple/altars. Let's use this to extend our presence. We do
*not* need
> > to be only WWW, we can be local. If only one person in the immediate
> > area has access to the 'net, then so be it. That person may
become the
> > regional governor and liason.
>
> If I may say so, we are already doing that. You have repeated a false
> assertion that's a "pet peeve" of mine; to wit, that Nova Roma is "only
> WWW". Face-to-face meetings, both on a local and broader level, are
> constantly taking place. We have the beginnings of regularly
scheduled local
> meetings and local groups here in New Jersey, and I know Germania has a
> framework in place to facilitate the creation of local chapters.
Meetings go
> on in California, Australia, Germania, Britannia, Nova Britannia,
> Mediatlantica, America Austoccidentalis, and probably many more
places than
> I can remember off the top of my head. That is a good trend, and one I
> believe will only continue and grow.
>
> However, I am gratified that this topic has come up again, as the
question
> of local chapters is one that's close to my heart; I had actually
brought it
> up at the beginning of the year, but it didn't seem to get much
traction at
> the time. I still have a draft lex kicking around my hard drive
somewhere
> detailing my take on some of the organizational aspects of such groups
> (similar to, but not the same as, the edictum posted by
Diocletianus). I'll
> see if I can't dig it out.
>
> Certainly, approaching the subject on a province-by-province level will
> prove unacceptable in the long run. To have a municipium be one thing in
> Germania, and something completely different in Mediatlantica, would be
> chaotic at best. I think some sort of standard nomenclature and
> organizational plan would be beneficial.
>
> I believe, however, before we start getting involved in the minutae
of how
> local chapters are named, formed, and organized, we need to be
clearer on
> what, precisely, their purpose would be and what, precisely, the
benefits
> would be to the cives involved. The question was originally raised by my
> Assensus; why would people form an official local chapter, and be
subject to
> the associated bureaucracy and red tape, rather than just getting
together
> on an ongoing informal basis?
>
> I must say, I'm still contemplating that question. Other than somewhat
> artificial rewards such as century points (naturally, century points
would
> still be awarded for those undertaking positions of responsibility
in local
> groups, but that would either leave out those who were simply
"members" with
> no responsibility, or lead us to a position where local groups were
made up
> of all chiefs and no indians), why form an "official" local group, as
> opposed to simply getting together informally?
>
> In short, what can the Republic offer such people that organize
themselves
> into a group, that it cannot offer to people who do not?
>
> I would be eager to hear what folks have to say on the subject.
>

Salvete,

The benifits of a charterd local group.

1. Sharing Nova Roma's NPC status. This means that as an offical part
of Nova Roma fund raising activities that are forbidden to private
groups would be permitted, and that taxes would NOT have to be paid on
any funds generated.

2. Organizational aid. Nova Roma's leadership has allready been
through the growing pains of developing an organization with allmost
1000 members from nothing in a few years.

3. Central planning. Co-events on a regional, state or Provincial
level can be more easily planned as part of a larger organization,
than as seperate ad-hoc groups.

As to defining a Municipia, I would define it as an area that is
within a maximum of a one hour commute from the meeting area. I think
it would be best if we set up municipia within the major towns and
cities of the Provinces, and included surrounding areas up to an hours
drive as the Municipia's Ager Publis. This would mean that a citizen
would be within an hours commute to his/her municipia.

Roma had many different models of government at this most local of
levels, and we can emulate her. I would include an option to set up
the government of the Municipia as a Polis, if the citizens prefered
the Greek Polis government to the standard Roman system. We need room
for growth too. a Standatd structure that is set up for 5 to 10
citizens will be a handicap in the future in a Municipia that has 25
or more citizens.

I think it would be a good idea to look at the lodge structure of
groups like the Masons, the Elks, and The Moose. These groups have a
lot of experance (good and bad) regarding local chapters and we may be
able to learn a lot from how they handle thier lodges, because we will
have many of the same problems in setting up the Municipia.

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Militarium Expansion
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:39:26 -0400 (EDT)

Master Marcus Sentius Accipiter;

The purposes of the Militarium Expansion are clearly spelled out in the
proposal which has been placed on the Main List for everyone's
information.

The proposal is an outgrowth of the Senior Consul's request for the
Militarium to take a more active part in providing the Senate and the
Citizenship with information about the activities, opportunities and
accomplishments of the Sponsored Legions of Nova Roma and in the
recruiting activities for finding and offering sponsorship to those
legions not yet involved with Nova Roma.

The Legions will maintain an independent status in and of themselves,
and will not be required in any way to provide information that they do
not wish to provide to NR for any reason. This proposal was drawn up in
it's basic form by a Legion Commander for the benefit of both sponsored
legions, Nova Roma as well as new legions for the sharing of information
regarding military documentation and information.

The Militarium is currently a repository for the information and data
already gathered as well as previous issues of the Militarium Newsletter
"Pilum", and is an obvious place for similar information provided on
legion history, accomplishments, activities, equipment sales, and
various reenactment programs of interest to Nova Roma.

Respectfully;
Marcus Audens----
Praefectus Castorum -- Sodalitas Militarium -- Nova Roma, ProConsul and
Senator

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: Expansion and Taxes
From:	PompeiaAntoniaCaesar <europamoon7@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2001 21:43:27 -0700 (PDT)

---
Avete,

One of the main problems local chapters have always
had with international/national organizations is
having to allocate more funds to the main organization
than the locals felt was fair. For instance if a
membership costs $25.00, $10 of that amount goes to
the central org leaving the local chapter minus that
amount per person for their own treasury. It can only
be justified if there are benefits worth the amount
being sent. The central org needs to compensate to
the local chapter what it takes in some way or
another. This lack of support is the biggest problem
that I have seen. Also, sometimes when the local
chapter becomes large enough it will break away, and
get it's own 501C3 status and become ia new
organization especially if there are personal
conflicts associated with the need to become
independent financially. Nova Roma central needs to
provide to the provinces what they cannot obtain
themselves or what would be the point.

Vale,

Pompeia Antonia Caesar






Lucius Sicinius Drusus <lsicinius@--------> wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, "Flavius Vedius Germanicus"
> <germa--------s@--------> wrote: > > Salvete
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > Fro--------ohn M. Osborne [--------to:john@--------]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:45 AM
> > >
> > > I realize that Nova Roma is founded, and
> primarily attainable, in the
> > > meta-world of the Internet. Rather than
> focusing on that, though, we
> > > should be looking to the outlying communities
> for expansion
> membership.
> > > I am a member of the SCA as well, and we
> actively search out new
> > > members. This is done through public
> performances, oration, education
> > > programs, and varying outreach. One of the
> requirements of our
> priests
> > > (in NR) is that they perform and establish local
> ritual and
> > > temple/altars. Let's use this to extend our
> presence. We do
> *not* need
> > > to be only WWW, we can be local. If only one
> person in the immediate
> > > area has access to the 'net, then so be it.
> That person may
> become the
> > > regional governor and liason.
> >
> > If I may say so, we are already doing that. You
> have repeated a false
> > assertion that's a "pet peeve" of mine; to wit,
> that Nova Roma is "only
> > WWW". Face-to-face meetings, both on a local and
> broader level, are
> > constantly taking place. We have the beginnings of
> regularly
> scheduled local
> > meetings and local groups here in New Jersey, and
> I know Germania has a
> > framework in place to facilitate the creation of
> local chapters.
> Meetings go
> > on in California, Australia, Germania, Britannia,
> Nova Britannia,
> > Mediatlantica, America Austoccidentalis, and
> probably many more
> places than
> > I can remember off the top of my head. That is a
> good trend, and one I
> > believe will only continue and grow.
> >
> > However, I am gratified that this topic has come
> up again, as the
> question
> > of local chapters is one that's close to my heart;
> I had actually
> brought it
> > up at the beginning of the year, but it didn't
> seem to get much
> traction at
> > the time. I still have a draft lex kicking around
> my hard drive
> somewhere
> > detailing my take on some of the organizational
> aspects of such groups
> > (similar to, but not the same as, the edictum
> posted by
> Diocletianus). I'll
> > see if I can't dig it out.
> >
> > Certainly, approaching the subject on a
> province-by-province level will
> > prove unacceptable in the long run. To have a
> municipium be one thing in
> > Germania, and something completely different in
> Mediatlantica, would be
> > chaotic at best. I think some sort of standard
> nomenclature and
> > organizational plan would be beneficial.
> >
> > I believe, however, before we start getting
> involved in the minutae
> of how
> > local chapters are named, formed, and organized,
> we need to be
> clearer on
> > what, precisely, their purpose would be and what,
> precisely, the
> benefits
> > would be to the cives involved. The question was
> originally raised by my
> > Assensus; why would people form an official local
> chapter, and be
> subject to
> > the associated bureaucracy and red tape, rather
> than just getting
> together
> > on an ongoing informal basis?
> >
> > I must say, I'm still contemplating that question.
> Other than somewhat
> > artificial rewards such as century points
> (naturally, century points
> would
> > still be awarded for those undertaking positions
> of responsibility
> in local
> > groups, but that would either leave out those who
> were simply
> "members" with
> > no responsibility, or lead us to a position where
> local groups were
> made up
> > of all chiefs and no indians), why form an
> "official" local group, as
> > opposed to simply getting together informally?
> >
> > In short, what can the Republic offer such people
> that organize
> themselves
> > into a group, that it cannot offer to people who
> do not?
> >
> > I would be eager to hear what folks have to say on
> the subject.
> >
>
> Salvete,
>
> The benifits of a charterd local group.
>
> 1. Sharing Nova Roma's NPC status. This means that
> as an offical part
> of Nova Roma fund raising activities that are
> forbidden to private
> groups would be permitted, and that taxes would NOT
> have to be paid on
> any funds generated.
>
> 2. Organizational aid. Nova Roma's leadership has
> allready been
> through the growing pains of developing an
> organization with allmost
> 1000 members from nothing in a few years.
>
> 3. Central planning. Co-events on a regional, state
> or Provincial
> level can be more easily planned as part of a larger
> organization,
> than as seperate ad-hoc groups.
>
> As to defining a Municipia, I would define it as an
> area that is
> within a maximum of a one hour commute from the
> meeting area. I think
> it would be best if we set up municipia within the
> major towns and
> cities of the Provinces, and included surrounding
> areas up to an hours
> drive as the Municipia's Ager Publis. This would
> mean that a citizen
> would be within an hours commute to his/her
> municipia.
>
> Roma had many different models of government at this
> most local of
> levels, and we can emulate her. I would include an
> option to set up
> the government of the Municipia as a Polis, if the
> citizens prefered
> the Greek Polis government to the standard Roman
> system. We need room
> for growth too. a Standatd structure that is set up
> for 5 to 10
> citizens will be a handicap in the future in a
> Municipia that has 25
> or more citizens.
>
> I think it would be a good idea to look at the lodge
> structure of
> groups like the Masons, the Elks, and The Moose.
> These groups have a
> lot of experance (good and bad) regarding local
> chapters and we may be
> able to learn a lot from how they handle thier
> lodges, because we will
> have many of the same problems in setting up the
> Municipia.
>
> Valete,
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rome - Byzantium
From:	Jeff Smith <JSmithCSA@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:42:59 -0700 (PDT)

> Message: 19
> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:55:59 EDT
> From: QFabiusMaxmi@--------
> Subject: Re: Re: Rome - Byzantium

> Christianity was the religio and no other was
> tolerated. Any heresy was
> stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?

It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
under the Emperors. The tradition of executing those
who do not believe the same way you do is an old one
-- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did it
end there.

Dalmaticus



=====
JEFFREY C. SMITH
HQ USAREUR/7A
CMR 420, BOX 2839
APO AE 09063-2839

"Leadership is nature's way of removing morons from the productive flow." -Dilbert

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Expansion and Taxes
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 01:46:38 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, L. Sicini Druse.

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

<<previous post snipped>>

> Salvete,
>
> The benifits of a charterd local group.
>
> 1. Sharing Nova Roma's NPC status. This means that as an offical part
> of Nova Roma fund raising activities that are forbidden to private
> groups would be permitted, and that taxes would NOT have to be paid
> on
> any funds generated.
>
> 2. Organizational aid. Nova Roma's leadership has allready been
> through the growing pains of developing an organization with allmost
> 1000 members from nothing in a few years.
>
> 3. Central planning. Co-events on a regional, state or Provincial
> level can be more easily planned as part of a larger organization,
> than as seperate ad-hoc groups.

To these I would add the possibility to be granted access to part of
the funds reserved for the Provinciae by the propraetor.

> As to defining a Municipia, I would define it as an area that is
> within a maximum of a one hour commute from the meeting area. I think
> it would be best if we set up municipia within the major towns and
> cities of the Provinces, and included surrounding areas up to an
> hours
> drive as the Municipia's Ager Publis. This would mean that a citizen
> would be within an hours commute to his/her municipia.

It does seem a good idea, although one hour's time could seem too small
for some cities (even for my hometown Madrid, with its 5 million
people, which is not so big). Make two hours and a half through
metropolitan transit system (not long distance systems) and we have a
deal ;-).

> Roma had many different models of government at this most local of
> levels, and we can emulate her. I would include an option to set up
> the government of the Municipia as a Polis, if the citizens prefered
> the Greek Polis government to the standard Roman system. We need room
> for growth too. a Standatd structure that is set up for 5 to 10
> citizens will be a handicap in the future in a Municipia that has 25
> or more citizens.

I like the idea of the Polis. It is both historically accurate and will
also add to the enrichment of our offer to the general public ;-).

> I think it would be a good idea to look at the lodge structure of
> groups like the Masons, the Elks, and The Moose. These groups have a
> lot of experance (good and bad) regarding local chapters and we may
> be
> able to learn a lot from how they handle thier lodges, because we
> will
> have many of the same problems in setting up the Municipia.

My good friend Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus also suggested some time
ago to include the Witnesses of Jehovah in this group (strange as it
may seem, they are rather good at creating local chapters).


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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



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

Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN (Religio Romana): ante diem XV Kalendas Sextilias (July 18th)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:58:39 +0100

Salvete omnes

This is one of the dies comitiales (C), when committees of citizens can vote
on political or criminal matters.

Today is the Alliensis Dies, which marks a double disaster.
In this day, the Fabii were anihilated in an ambush at Cremera.
In this day too, in 390 BCE, the Romans were defeated at the Allia river by
the Gauls led by Brennus, which caused the capture and burning of Rome.
>From this later disaster, the day came to be called Alliensis Dies ("Day of
the
Allia"). The defeat was due to the fact that "consular tribune Sulpicius
had not offered acceptable sacrifices on July 16th (the day after the Ides),
and without having secured the good will of the Gods, the Roman army was
exposed to the enemy. Some think that it was for this reason that on the day
after the Ides in each month, all religious functions were ordered to be
suspended, and hence it became the custom to observe the second and the
middle days of the month in the same way (see [Livius, A.U.C. 6.1]).
This is thus a "dies ater" (black day) or "dies religiosus" (ill-omened day)
to be observed through abstinence of public and private business.

The month of Quinctilis is sacred to Iuppiter. It was renamed Iulius in 44
BCE in honour of the deified C. Iulius Caesar.

Dii vos bene ament,
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
From:	mp987654@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:28:51 -0000

Does anyone know whether Gaius Julius Caesar supported the idea of
Roman Republic or Roman Empire? We all know that Caesar helped to
change the course of Rome. After his death, Roman Republic became
Roman Empire as Augustus (Octavianus) became the first "Emperor". I
am interested to know whether or not Caesar actually wanted to
convert Roman Republic to Roman Empire.

I know Caesar used to say that to have one good king, you must also
have dozen of weak kings. In other words, one could find only one
good king among twelve kings. I also think that Caesar used to say
that a "King equals Monarchy" and the King forms the "entire"
Monarchy; when a King dies, the monarchy and most (but not all) of
the things he lived for and created die with him. On the contrary, a
consul or dictator(within a Republic) forms only a "part" of the
Republic and thus when he dies,the Republic doesn't die with him but
continues living.

This is what I think but I am not sure I am right. That is why I
post this message. I think that Caesar believed in a sort of a mix
between Monarchy and a Republic. In other words, I think that Caesar
believed that Republic is generally better than Monarchy but if the
Republic produces a great man, just like himself, teh man should be
allowed to rule as a King. Upon the death of such man, the
"temporary" Monarchy should revert back to the Republic, unless the
Republic would again produce another great man. However, producing
two great man in a row was, according to Caesar's beliefs, unlikely;
because one good king also requires twelve weak king.

I am not asking you to tell me whether you prefer Monarchy or
Republic but I am asking you to tell me what Caesar thought. I would
appreciate any hystorical facts relating to this issue.

Caesar





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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rome - Byzantium
From:	Kristoffer From <from@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:44:54 +0200

Jeff Smith wrote:
> > Christianity was the religio and no other was
> > tolerated. Any heresy was
> > stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
>
> It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
> failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
> under the Emperors. The tradition of executing those
> who do not believe the same way you do is an old one
> -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did it
> end there.

Salve, Dalmatice.

I apologize, but certainly the romans didn't persecute those who held a
different religious belief than themselves? How then could they hold
together an empire stretching all across mare nostrum? If I've
understood things correctly, the thing about christianity that the
romans had a problem with, was the unwillingness of the christians to
accept the roman religion. They were free to believe in God, but they
refused to even acknowledge the roman gods, or the emperor. The
christians belief and their way of expressing it was what caused the
conflict, not any need on the romans' behalf to hunt down anyone with a
different opinion, which I haven't seen any proof that they ever did.

Just my opinions, feel free to correct me.

Vale,

Titus Octavius Pius,
Consiliarius Thules,
Praeco Anarei Thules,
Scriba to the Curator Araneum

AKA Kristoffer From

---

Si hoc signum legere potes,
operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
et fructuosis potiri potes.

- Not-so-famous quotation

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !y-
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------



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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rome - Byzantium
From:	"Gaius Marcius Coriolanus" <coriolanus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:30:51 -0000

Salvete

I must respectfully disagree with Dalmaticus. Persecutions wasn't
Roman. It doesn't matter if it was proscriptions or bloody
repressions of christians. It was not Roman and it is in opposing
with Roman virtues.

Maybe we could start next stream on reason why it all happened.

Vale
Coriolanus




> Jeff Smith wrote:
> > > Christianity was the religio and no other was
> > > tolerated. Any heresy was
> > > stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
> >
> > It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
> > failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
> > under the Emperors. The tradition of executing those
> > who do not believe the same way you do is an old one
> > -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did it
> > end there.
>
> Salve, Dalmatice.
>
> I apologize, but certainly the romans didn't persecute those who
held a
> different religious belief than themselves? How then could they hold
> together an empire stretching all across mare nostrum? If I've
> understood things correctly, the thing about christianity that the
> romans had a problem with, was the unwillingness of the christians
to
> accept the roman religion. They were free to believe in God, but
they
> refused to even acknowledge the roman gods, or the emperor. The
> christians belief and their way of expressing it was what caused the
> conflict, not any need on the romans' behalf to hunt down anyone
with a
> different opinion, which I haven't seen any proof that they ever
did.
>
> Just my opinions, feel free to correct me.
>
> Vale,
>
> Titus Octavius Pius,
> Consiliarius Thules,
> Praeco Anarei Thules,
> Scriba to the Curator Araneum
>
> AKA Kristoffer From
>
> ---
>
> Si hoc signum legere potes,
> operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
> et fructuosis potiri potes.
>
> - Not-so-famous quotation
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
> o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
> R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !y-
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
From:	"Gaius Marcius Coriolanus" <coriolanus@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:47:41 -0000

Salve



--- In novaroma@--------, mp987654@-------- wrote:
> Does anyone know whether Gaius Julius Caesar supported the idea of
> Roman Republic or Roman Empire? We all know that Caesar helped to
> change the course of Rome. After his death, Roman Republic became
> Roman Empire as Augustus (Octavianus) became the first "Emperor".
I
> am interested to know whether or not Caesar actually wanted to
> convert Roman Republic to Roman Empire.

There is no one sure on this issue. But most probable answer is that
Caesar wanted to convert Republic similar way as Octavianus did. We
all know the Roman meaning about kings. No one was so strong and so
dare to call himself king in Roman history (after Bruttus of course).

Republic was destroyed so what Caesar could do?

Could he restore power of senate? No. Senate was powerless a long
time before Pharsalus.

Could he hold office of dictator forever? No. Caesar was not Sulla.
Sulla (if he was younger and healthy) could hold it but Caesar none.
Caesar was mercifull and it killed him after all.

Could he became emperor like Octavianus did? No. Roman citizens was
not ready for it although they loved him. It would cause next series
of war.

He was adjudged to death as I see it.



> I know Caesar used to say that to have one good king, you must also
> have dozen of weak kings. In other words, one could find only one
> good king among twelve kings. I also think that Caesar used to say
> that a "King equals Monarchy" and the King forms the "entire"
> Monarchy; when a King dies, the monarchy and most (but not all) of
> the things he lived for and created die with him. On the contrary,
a
> consul or dictator(within a Republic) forms only a "part" of the
> Republic and thus when he dies,the Republic doesn't die with him
but
> continues living.
>
> This is what I think but I am not sure I am right. That is why I
> post this message. I think that Caesar believed in a sort of a mix
> between Monarchy and a Republic. In other words, I think that
Caesar
> believed that Republic is generally better than Monarchy but if
the
> Republic produces a great man, just like himself, teh man should be
> allowed to rule as a King. Upon the death of such man, the
> "temporary" Monarchy should revert back to the Republic, unless the
> Republic would again produce another great man. However, producing
> two great man in a row was, according to Caesar's beliefs,
unlikely;
> because one good king also requires twelve weak king.

Interesting idea. I think that he prefered republic too. But as you
said republic sometime produces great man that can serve it or that
can destroy it like Caesar himself. And he surely knew it.


Coriolanus




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
From:	PompeiaAntoniaCaesar <europamoon7@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:10:27 -0700 (PDT)

--- mp987654@-------- wrote:
> Does anyone know whether Gaius Julius Caesar
> supported the idea of
> Roman Republic or Roman Empire? We all know that
> Caesar helped to
> change the course of Rome. After his death, Roman
> Republic became
> Roman Empire as Augustus (Octavianus) became the
> first "Emperor". I
> am interested to know whether or not Caesar
> actually wanted to
> convert Roman Republic to Roman Empire.
>
> I know Caesar used to say that to have one good
> king, you must also
> have dozen of weak kings. In other words, one could
> find only one
> good king among twelve kings. I also think that
> Caesar used to say
> that a "King equals Monarchy" and the King forms the
> "entire"
> Monarchy; when a King dies, the monarchy and most
> (but not all) of
> the things he lived for and created die with him.
> On the contrary, a
> consul or dictator(within a Republic) forms only a
> "part" of the
> Republic and thus when he dies,the Republic doesn't
> die with him but
> continues living.
>
> This is what I think but I am not sure I am right.
> That is why I
> post this message. I think that Caesar believed in
> a sort of a mix
> between Monarchy and a Republic. In other words, I
> think that Caesar
> believed that Republic is generally better than
> Monarchy but if the
> Republic produces a great man, just like himself,
> teh man should be
> allowed to rule as a King. Upon the death of such
> man, the
> "temporary" Monarchy should revert back to the
> Republic, unless the
> Republic would again produce another great man.
> However, producing
> two great man in a row was, according to Caesar's
> beliefs, unlikely;
> because one good king also requires twelve weak
> king.
>
> I am not asking you to tell me whether you prefer
> Monarchy or
> Republic but I am asking you to tell me what Caesar
> thought. I would
> appreciate any hystorical facts relating to this
> issue.
>
> Caesar


Ave,

I don't think anyone of us can speak for Caesar but
can only go but what has been written about him and by
him. Surely, he portrayed himself in manner, dress
and action as an individual who wanted absolute rule.
This was his undoing for the Romans did not want
history to repeat itself (the tyranny under the
Estruscan Kings). If you look at the titles he was
granted (more than any other Roman had been) and yet
he still wanted more. It was this greed for power
that had been his undoing. As he himself stated "I
would rather be first in a little Iberian village than
second in Rome." Augustus was really a constitutional
monarch. He presented the guise of a servant of the
people and Senate while maintaining absolute power.
This was his brilliance. He knew where to draw the
line.

Vale,

Pompeia Antonia Caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
From:	"Julilla Sempronia Magna" <julilla@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 17:24:56 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "Gaius Marcius Coriolanus" <coriolanus@c...>
wrote:
> Salve
>
>
> --- In novaroma@--------, mp987654@-------- wrote:
> > Does anyone know whether Gaius Julius Caesar supported the idea
of Roman Republic or Roman Empire? We all know that Caesar helped to
change the course of Rome. After his death, Roman Republic became
Roman Empire as Augustus (Octavianus) became the first "Emperor".
> I am interested to know whether or not Caesar actually wanted to
convert Roman Republic to Roman Empire.


May I be so bold as to suggest my excellent amica's Web site on
Caesar? http://heraklia.fws1.com/ -- it is part of the Nova Roma
webring, as well as others, and, new as it is, has already won awards.

Heraklia, the Web author, has compiled an excellent biography of
Caesar and his contemporaries. The section on "Legislation and
Reform" and "The Private Man" are excellent insights into this
brilliant and complex man.---
cura et valeas,

@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| http://julilla.tripod.com/
Daily Life in Ancient Rome
@____@ julilla@--------
||||







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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rome - Byzantium
From:	antoniuscorvusseptimius@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 18:45:28 -0000

> >
> > It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
> > failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
> > under the Emperors. The tradition of executing those
> > who do not believe the same way you do is an old one
> > -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did it
> > end there.

Salvete,

The Christians were being singled out because of their anti-
Roman political structure. Not because of their beliefs. Otherwise,
why were other monothiestic ideals (alive and doing well in Roma
antica, as they are flourishing now) not persecuted against?
>From the early aramaiac writtings, you can certainly see how anti-
establishment early Christianity was.. Its there on the papyrus that no
one wants to talk about.Early Christians were opportunists like
everyone else in history, as well as present.
It was VERY Roman to PROTECT the ideals of the senate and the
people.And so they did.Being very inclusive toward other's spiritual
beliefs, Romans only did harm to those that would conspire toward the
eventual implement of their own ideologies.This (I belive) sparked the
expansion of Roma, by the way.Ask yourself why the early Christians
were persecuted.And not the other monotheistic peoples (Italkim for
instance).Then follow your rational thoughts toward reading the history
of Christianity and its early intentions.Which ultimately came to
fruition.Constantine? Did he not see the sign as a political one? Its
obvious that he did...
I mean no disrespect to the Christian god.I only question his
peoples motives.And there are many more questions about Christianity
that I wouldnt dare ask.. Because of that respect issue that we Romans
have inherrited.

Semper Fidelis, A. Corvus Septimius





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

Subject:	[novaroma] Tribune's Report of Senate Business
From:	labienus@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:49:33 US/Central

Tribunus Plebis T Labienus Fortunatus Quiritibus SPD

The Senate has finished its latest session, and the votes have been tallied.
Once again, I ask each Senator who voted to make sure that I have correctly
reported his or her vote and any comments he or she may have made.

The following fourteen Senatores cast votes. They are referred to below by
their initials.
PC Patricia Cassia
MCJ Marcus Cassius Julianus
LCSF Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
LEC Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus
QFM Quintus Fabius Maximus
AGG Antonius Gryllus Graecus
AICPM Alexander Iulius Caesar Probus Macedonius
DIPI Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus
MII Marcus Iunius Iulianus
TLF Titus Labienus Fortunatus
MMA Marcus Minucius Audens
MOG Marcus Octavius Germanicus
LSA Lucius Sergius Australicus
FVG Flavius Vedius Germanicus

The following four Senatores did not vote.
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Minervina Iucundia Flavia
Gaius Marius Merullus
Gaius Tullius Triumphius Cicero

The results of the vote follow, along with the individual votes cast by each
Senator. For those unfamiliar with the Latin terms, "UTI ROGAS" means a vote
in favor, "ANTIQUO" or "NEGAT" mean a vote against, and "ABSTINEO" is an
abstention.
__________________

ITEM I. INCLUSION OF ICELAND IN THULE PROVINCIA
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS A logical inclusion. Rome would have done the same.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS Marcus Audens casts a YES vote for this item in support of
the ProPraetor of the Provincia Thule. ProPraetor Quintillianus is a careful
and precise administrator, and his recommendation in this case makes a great
deal of sense. I applaud his bringing this item to the Senate's attention.
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM II. DIPLOMATIC RECOGNITION OF THE KINGDOM OF NUMIDIA
**DEFEATED 4 For, 10 Against
PC ANTIQUO I will not be voting for such recognition and alliances until
we have concrete standards for determining their validity and value to Nova
Roma.
MCJ ANTIQUO Numidia, while enthusiastic, does not seem to be a viable
sovereignty project. While I encourage friendly relations with all
micronations, official association in this case does not seem favorable for us.
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC ANTIQUO
QFM UTI ROGAS I was the first Consul that Jubal IV contacted. I helped
him with his military knowledge of the Numidians. Juba is learning more about
Numidia, and he plans to use us (Nova Roma) as a model to set up his kingdom.
Even if he never grows past the planning stage, still we should encourage such
projects, since they add to the general knowledge of the Mediterranean Basin
during the period of Rome.
AGG ANTIQUO
AICPM ANTIQUO
DIPI ANTIQUO Numidia does not meet the required level of a serious
sovereignty project for us to open relations with them now.
MII ANTIQUO
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA ANTIQUO Marcus Audens casts a NO vote for this item because in
reviewing the material available, it does not appear to me that there would be
any mutual advantage to such a recognition at this time. I make mention of the
possible extention of an effort to make contact on a Sodalitas Level in order
to better have an idea about the citizens of Numidia. To that end, I would
offer services of the Sodalitas Militarium as a beginning to share our cultural
and military histories and a Mutual sharing of ideals and future goals for both
our micronations.
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO NEGAT I am of two minds on this. Numidia is similar, in some ways, to
what we began with, but it does not yet have the breadth and depth of what Nova
Roma has become. I think this step should be reconsidered if and when Numidia
has developed into a larger and more active entity.
FVG ANTIQUO

ITEM III. OFFICIAL CHARTERING OF THE SODALITAS MUNERUM
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS I am sure the organizing parties, being responsible
Citizens, will do what needs to be done to protect the safety of participants
and the liability of Nova Roma.
LCSF UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS I believe this Sodalitas will be a great benefit to Nova
Roma, particularly in drawing interest from the public at gatherings and
events.
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS Gladiators and Muneas seem to be the one thing that common
public finds fascinating about Rome. We would be amiss to not take advantage
of this avenue for publicity. I myself have just finished a 14,000 word
article on the Gladiator's history in Rome, so it is a subject near and dear to
my heart.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM IV. APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNOR FOR PROVINCIA HISPANIA
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS I believe M. Salix Vigilius will do the job well and be a
credit to the Provincia.
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS M. Salix Vigilius has shown interest in Nova Roma since the
day he joined. If he maintains this level of interest he will do the job, and
keep the peace in Hispania. My spiritual ancestor agrees.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM V. APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNOR FOR AMERICA AUSTRORIENTALIS
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS I am sure that Drusus will do an excellent job. I have been
impressed by his ideas on a number of occasions, and it is obvious he has both
the skill and energy to work on behalf of the Provincia.
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS Though I'm sorrowful of Iuncundia stepping down, Lucius
Sinicus Drusus is the person to succeeded her. He understands Roman history,
he has ideas we have not considered yet, his location more central to the
province and most of all he has personal finances that will help organize the
province. Minervia Iuncundia lacked that resource.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS! L. Sicinus is a capable and intelligent citizen, and he
deserves this position.
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM VI. ALLOCATION OF DISCRETIONARY FUNDS
**PASSED 12 For, 2 Against
PC UTI ROGAS Assuming these funds are approved, I hope to get them,
together with other contributions from Citizens, to the Vindolanda Trust by
Aug. 1. Those who wish to add to this amount may do so by visiting
http://www.novaroma.org/aerarium_saturni/vindolanda/ as soon as possible.
LCSF ANTIQUO
MCJ UTI ROGAS I also agree that it is important that Nova Roma get
positive public exposure from this charity fund - somthing we must keep an eye
toward with all such involvements. We should not spend public money without it
also having a benefit to Nova Roma. Happily I believe this will happen in this
case... there will be information on our website, and also mention of the
project elsewhere.
LEC UTI ROGAS Should we be given assurance that Nova Roma will be given
credit for it's financial and advertisement contributions, I support this
Allocation of Funds. Otherwise send only those monies that were contributed
voluntarily.
QFM ANTIQUO While what befall Vindolanda was unfortunate, the use of Nova
Roma monies with no clear benefit to Nova Roma should be voted against. If we
were presenting a check for 10k with the media looking on, that would be
something. This is not. Two hundred American will keep them operating for 8
hours. I do not believe a single member of the dig are citizens. This is just
an attempt to sell the dues idea to the citizens so when they ask: "What is
Nova Roma doing with our money?" we can show them this one donation.
Understand Conscript Fathers, I am not against the principle of giving money to
sites to further the study of Rome. After all this is one of the reasons NR
was founded. But until we have dues in place and the collections are actually
happening, we should not be spending Nova Roma's meager resources.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS While it is a large expenditure out of our current treasury,
it is a worthwhile both because of what the money will be used for and for the
attention it will bring to Nova Roma.
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS Marcus Audens casts a YES vote for this item, as it falls
entirely in line with one of the major reasons that Nova Roma was formed. I
have been privileged to visit Vindolanda, and was most impressed with what I
saw there and with what was planned for that site. I have visited every
museum, and major archaelogical site along Hadrian's Wall, and have walked on
the wall and alongside it for long stretches to get a feel for the structure.
My personal feeling is that there could not be a better place to donate our
hard-won funds than to Vindolanda at this time.
MOG UTI ROGAS This is exactly the sort of thing we should be doing, to
enhance our reputation in the community.
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM VII. SENATUS CONSULTUM ON DEFINING A QUORUM
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS This was discussed last year. I'm glad to see it completed.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM VIII. TAXATION
**PASSED 10 For, 4 Against
PC UTI ROGAS As this will require changes to our accounting procedures, I
encourage the Consuls to appoint a committee immediately on passage of this
item to do the work of making this system operate smoothly.
MCJ UTI ROGAS! I will be thrilled to see Nova Roma gain some dependable
real world resources at last.
LCSF ANTIQUO
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM ANTIQUO Yes, Quintus Fabius Maximus the largest single proponent of
taxes in Nova Roma is voting against this item. Why? Because Conscript
Fathers, it needs to be reworded and certain provisions added. Right now, the
first time we have a problem, we will have to revisit this. And rewrite it.
Why not take care of it correctly the first time?
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI ANTIQUO This is the toughest item to vote on. While the idea of
taxation is a good one and a necessary one, the specifc proposal is deeply
flawed. There are real economic differences between the various countries and
this ignores those differences. While $12 is little to Americans or most
Western Europeans (though many Western Europeans might disagree considering how
little their governments leave them after stealing most of their money through
excessive taxation) it is a lot to people in poorer nations, especially Eastern
Europe. In relative terms of the impact it will have on those people it is
somewhat equivalent to the tax being several hundred dollars to Americans, an
amount that few Americans even in the senate would be willing to pay. An
alternate, workable suggestion made by some people was to start with a lower
amount, about half this number. Far more people would pay that lower tax and
thus the overall amount rasied would be greater. I think that the estimate I
have seen that a third of our current populace will be willing to pay this tax
is optimistic and think we will be lucky to get 20-25% of the populace to pay
the tax. Despite all this, I am tempted to vote for the item--because we
desperately need a tax system--and then hope for a more equitable solution
later but fear that would not happen, so I must vote no.
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS Though I would have preferred to include some sort of
mechanism that recognized the vast discrepancies between the economies of some
of our provinciae (or rather the macronations that contain/are contained within
them), the measure is otherwise a good one.
MMA UTI ROGAS Marcus Audens casts a YES vote for this item because the
basic proposal is a good one. However, I agree with my colleagues who have
sounded a warning that some provision should be made in this taxation package
for the inequality between various nation's economies. As has been said
before, that point has been discussed at length with good arguments on both
sides, and is one of the most difficult aspects of this item to reach
concurrence upon.
MOG NEGAT!
LSAO UTI ROGAS I would have preferred to start at a lower rate such as US$6
per annum, but better US$12 per annum than to go on debating it without doing
it!
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM IX. DISPOSITION OF TAXES TO PROVINCIA
**PASSED 10 For, 3 Against
MCJ UTI ROGAS However, it is my hope that we will need a minimum of people
to collect taxes, and that most payments will be done directly online. That
will eliminate a great deal of time, effort and paperwork.
LCSF ANTIQUO
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS No matter what happens with the tax leges the information
will have to be kept. I would have prefered the Ides of Martius. Ides are
Aprlus have a great many things happening in the days between the Kal. &
Ides
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI ANTIQUO This puts too much of a strict limit on where funds are to be
directed. I am all in favor of money being directed to the provinces but don't
think we should be limited as to what percentage that should be. The amount
sent to a province should be based on the specific needs of a province at that
time.
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO NEGAT I would prefer to consider this more before finalizing it. Will
collecting money from the provinces and then sending part of it back when
needed there cost us extra charges for transfers? Are we saying that we will
not trust our provincial officials because of a revolt that occurred in one
province? This proposal does not "feel right" to me. It needs more
consideration.
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM X. CREATION OF PROVINCIA MOESIA-DACIA
**DEFEATED 3 For, 11 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ ANTIQUO for the present. I personally have not seen enough evidence
of a need for this, or enough commonality among the modern nations proposed. If
more information is brought forth at a later date I would be happy to consider
it again.
LCSF ANTIQUO
LEC ANTIQUO
QFM ANTIQUO Since many of the modern nations contained in this proposed
province detest one another this would be a big mistake. Unlike the Roman
period these varius Tribus have now their own identities, and lumping them all
together will not work.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM ANTIQUO
DIPI ANTIQUO This does not take into account the modern sensibilities of
people living in those provinces.
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF ANTIQUO Considering the historic animosity between the region's
various ethnic groups, I am hesitant to lump these cives together in one
provincia without knowing their opinions on the matter.
MMA ANTIQUO Marcus Audens casts a NO vote for this item based on the lack
of detailed information regarding such a specific area, nationality, language
and other cultural differences.
MOG NEGAT Too many countries and languages in one province.
LSAO NEGAT To lump potential citizens of multiple Balkan nations together
into one province at this point seems unwise. The conflicts between states in
that area are legendary and ongoing. I would like to see citizens in these
areas working together and asking to become a province before we vote such into
existence.
FVG ANTIQUO

ITEM XI. CREATION OF PROVINCIA VENEDIA
*I. The province of Venedia is hereby created, consisting of the modern nation
of Poland.
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

*II. The province of Venedia is hereby created, consisting of the modern
nations of Poland and the Czech Republic.
**DEFEATED 0 For, 14 Against
PC ANTIQUO
MCJ ANTIQUO
LCSF ANTIQUO
LEC ANTIQUO
QFM ANTIQUO Again, Since the modern nations contained in this proposed
province detest one another this would not be a good idea.
AGG ANTIQUO
AICPM ANTIQUO
DIPI ANTIQUO
MII ANTIQUO
TLF ANTIQUO
MMA ANTIQUO Marcus Audens casts a NO vote for this item based upon the
lack of detailed information regarding such a specific area, nationality,
language and other cultural differences.
MOG NEGAT
LSAO NEGAT I have not seen any requests from residents of the Czech
Republic asking to be included in a province with Polish cives.
FVG ANTIQUO

ITEM XII. OFFICIAL SPONSORSHIP OF LEGIO SECUNDA AUGUSTA
**PASSED 14 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS They sound like a delightful group. May they grow and
prosper!
MCJ UTI ROGAS I'm pleased to see this new legion forming!
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS The Second can trace it's roots back to Iulius Caesar's
consular army's lego. Good to see this lego finally honored.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
LSAO UTI ROGAS Ave Kiwis!!!
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM XIII: EXPANSION OF SCOPE OF SODALITAS MILITARIUM
**PASSED 13 For, 0 Against
PC UTI ROGAS
MCJ UTI ROGAS The Sodalitas Militarium has been an absolute gem of a
program, and a great benefit to Nova Roma. The Citizens involved have proven
themselves to be knowledgable, and active, and I will be pleased to see their
function expanded. (Proof to the rumor that the reward for good work is *more*
work...)
LCSF UTI ROGAS
LEC UTI ROGAS
QFM UTI ROGAS One of our few well functioning Sodalitas. I'm sure Marcus
Minucius' leadership has something to do with this.
AGG UTI ROGAS
AICPM UTI ROGAS
DIPI UTI ROGAS
MII UTI ROGAS
TLF UTI ROGAS
MMA UTI ROGAS
MOG UTI ROGAS
FVG UTI ROGAS

ITEM XIV: OFFICIAL CHARTERING OF THE SODALITAS IUDEICA
**DEFEATED 1 For, 10 Against, 3 Abstentions
PC ANTIQUO While I entirely support the study of the Jewish religion and
Judaic history during the Roman era, this proposal is too broad, and as some
have remarked, seems more appropriate to organizing a Provincia than a study
group. I encourage Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix to consider whether it can be
more accurately focused on the Roman era and on study and learning, and to
resubmit this proposal after appropriate alterations.
LCSF UTI ROGAS
MCJ ANTIQUO I believe this proposal should be better defined so that it
has a Roman focus. As Nova Roma is about "things Roman", we should keep
Provincial studies "on topic" whenever possible.
LEC ANTIQUO
QFM ANTIQUO The college had reservations about this club. And until these
are resolved, I suggest we table this item for a later date
AGG ABSTINEO
AICPM ANTIQUO
DIPI ABSTINEO I must defer to the wishes of the Pontifex Maximus on this
issue and believe the differences regarding this propsal should be worked out
in a different venue.
MII ANTIQUO
TLF ANTIQUO
MMA ANTIQUO Marcus Audens casts a NO vote for this item solely in support
of the wishes of the Collegium Pontificum as related to the Nova Roma Senate by
the Pontifex Maximus Cassius Julianus.
MOG NEGAT
LSAO ABSTINEO In deference to the concerns and authority of the College of
Pontiffs and of the Pontifex Maximus.
FVG ANTIQUO In accordance with the wishes of the Collegium Pontificum, as
related by our Pontifex Maximus, I vote antiquo (no) to item XIV, "Official
Chartering of the Sodalitas Iudeica", to allow time for the proposal to be
reviewed and resubmitted.
_________________

Valete





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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Propraetor
From:	ksterne@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 19:04:19 -0000

Having just returned from a trip, I was a little confused and
congratulated Lucius Sicunius Drusus for his appointment as
Propraetor of America Austrorientalis BEFORE the Senate actually
voted for it.

Now it's official...Congratulations mi Druse! The province will
prosper on your watch.

Valete,
Gaius Popillius Laenas




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 1536
From:	"Lucius Equitius" <vze23hw7@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:15:17 -0400

Salvete, Quirites
________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Jeff Smith <JSmithCSA@-------->
> Subject: Re: Rome - Byzantium
>
> > Message: 19
> > Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:55:59 EDT
> > From: QFabiusMaxmi@--------
> > Subject: Re: Re: Rome - Byzantium
>
> > Christianity was the religio and no other was
> > tolerated. Any heresy was
> > stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
>
> It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
> failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
> under the Emperors. The tradition of executing those
> who do not believe the same way you do is an old one
> -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did it
> end there.
>
> Dalmaticus

I disagree. The Romans didn't execute people on account of what they
believed but rather on their actions. Actually, it was the Romans tolerance
that allowed for the development of Christianity. If the practitioners of
the Religio Romana had been as *zealous* as the Christians and their parent
faith the Jews there might not be a need for groups such as Nova Roma to
resurrect the Religio Romana.

Vale, L Equitius




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
From:	"Juan Carlos" <juancarloscruz@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:11:42 -0000

Hello how are u?
I think that it's kind of hard to guess what Caesar thought
really but I think that he prefered to have a Monarchy since you can fix the
government and the state a lot better under the one hand of a man than a
republic where a lot of people would have more opinions on what to do?
Well I guess I am right but that's just my theory ;-)


Juan Carlos

PS: I liked about Caesar is that he imitated Alexander in the practicing of
sports and discipline ;-)


"One must first work the body (exercise, diets). Strict perseverance in
significant and exquisite gestures together with the obligation to live only
with people who do not "let themselves go"--that is quite enough for one to
become significant, important and select, and in two or three generations
all this becomes inward" -Fredrich Nietzsche (Twilight of the Idols)


>From: mp987654@--------
>Reply-To: novaroma@--------
>To: novaroma@--------
>Subject: [novaroma] Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
>Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:28:51 -0000
>
>Does anyone know whether Gaius Julius Caesar supported the idea of
>Roman Republic or Roman Empire? We all know that Caesar helped to
>change the course of Rome. After his death, Roman Republic became
>Roman Empire as Augustus (Octavianus) became the first "Emperor". I
>am interested to know whether or not Caesar actually wanted to
>convert Roman Republic to Roman Empire.
>
>I know Caesar used to say that to have one good king, you must also
>have dozen of weak kings. In other words, one could find only one
>good king among twelve kings. I also think that Caesar used to say
>that a "King equals Monarchy" and the King forms the "entire"
>Monarchy; when a King dies, the monarchy and most (but not all) of
>the things he lived for and created die with him. On the contrary, a
>consul or dictator(within a Republic) forms only a "part" of the
>Republic and thus when he dies,the Republic doesn't die with him but
>continues living.
>
>This is what I think but I am not sure I am right. That is why I
>post this message. I think that Caesar believed in a sort of a mix
>between Monarchy and a Republic. In other words, I think that Caesar
>believed that Republic is generally better than Monarchy but if the
>Republic produces a great man, just like himself, teh man should be
>allowed to rule as a King. Upon the death of such man, the
>"temporary" Monarchy should revert back to the Republic, unless the
>Republic would again produce another great man. However, producing
>two great man in a row was, according to Caesar's beliefs, unlikely;
>because one good king also requires twelve weak king.
>
>I am not asking you to tell me whether you prefer Monarchy or
>Republic but I am asking you to tell me what Caesar thought. I would
>appreciate any hystorical facts relating to this issue.
>
>Caesar
>
>

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




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Question about Caesar. Republic or Monarchy?
From:	manius_constantinus_serapio@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:06:59 -0000

AVE

I think you have to remember:
1- Caesar obteined the name "imperator ad vitam" (it means
commander-in-chief of all roman armed forces)
2- He "adopted" Octavianus.

I think those two element explain his intention: he wanted to keep
all the power and create a sort of dynasty in which the pater chose
his filius-successor. That's what Octavianus Augustus did.

VALE MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO



--- In novaroma@--------, mp987654@-------- wrote:
> Does anyone know whether Gaius Julius Caesar supported the idea of
> Roman Republic or Roman Empire? We all know that Caesar helped to
> change the course of Rome. After his death, Roman Republic became
> Roman Empire as Augustus (Octavianus) became the first "Emperor".
I
> am interested to know whether or not Caesar actually wanted to
> convert Roman Republic to Roman Empire.
>
> I know Caesar used to say that to have one good king, you must also
> have dozen of weak kings. In other words, one could find only one
> good king among twelve kings. I also think that Caesar used to say
> that a "King equals Monarchy" and the King forms the "entire"
> Monarchy; when a King dies, the monarchy and most (but not all) of
> the things he lived for and created die with him. On the contrary,
a
> consul or dictator(within a Republic) forms only a "part" of the
> Republic and thus when he dies,the Republic doesn't die with him
but
> continues living.
>
> This is what I think but I am not sure I am right. That is why I
> post this message. I think that Caesar believed in a sort of a mix
> between Monarchy and a Republic. In other words, I think that
Caesar
> believed that Republic is generally better than Monarchy but if
the
> Republic produces a great man, just like himself, teh man should be
> allowed to rule as a King. Upon the death of such man, the
> "temporary" Monarchy should revert back to the Republic, unless the
> Republic would again produce another great man. However, producing
> two great man in a row was, according to Caesar's beliefs,
unlikely;
> because one good king also requires twelve weak king.
>
> I am not asking you to tell me whether you prefer Monarchy or
> Republic but I am asking you to tell me what Caesar thought. I
would
> appreciate any hystorical facts relating to this issue.
>
> Caesar




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rome - Byzantium
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:49:29 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, Jeff Smith <JSmithCSA@--------> wrote:
> > Message: 19
> > Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:55:59 EDT
> > From: QF--------sM--------@--------
> > Subject: Re: Re: Rome - Byzantium
>
> > Christianity was the religio and no other was
> > tolerated. Any heresy was
> > stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
>
> It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
> failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
> under the Emperors. The tradition of executing those
> who do not believe the same way you do is an old one
> -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did it
> end there.
>
> Dalmaticus
>
>
>
> =====
> JEFFREY C. SMITH

I agree, Jeffrey - I've been a Christian for most of my life, but
it's certainly true that Christians were heavily persecuted before
Constantine the Great, and it's equally true that an astounding
number of horrific, bloody, reprehensible acts have been committed in
the name of Christianity. Being Christian does not mean that I
abdicate my ethical responsibility to be objective about
Christianity, both modern and historical. By the same token, neither
the Republican Romans nor the Byzantine Romans achieved perfection in
these respects. Ironically, the dreaded and feared Ottomans were one
of the few Empires of their time to practice any significant level of
religious tolerance, as far as I know.

Valete,

R Palaeologvs





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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Rome - Byzantium
From:	martin p987654 <mp987654@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 05:46:40 -0700 (PDT)

Coriolanus

I agree that we should start a new stream. But please
if you disagree with Dalmaticus and make general
conclusions, please tell us what your rationale is.
Tell us "why."

Julius Gaius Caesar

--- Gaius Marcius Coriolanus <coriolanus@-------->
wrote:
> Salvete
>
> I must respectfully disagree with Dalmaticus.
> Persecutions wasn't
> Roman. It doesn't matter if it was proscriptions or
> bloody
> repressions of christians. It was not Roman and it
> is in opposing
> with Roman virtues.
>
> Maybe we could start next stream on reason why it
> all happened.
>
> Vale
> Coriolanus
>
>
>
>
> > Jeff Smith wrote:
> > > > Christianity was the religio and no other was
> > > > tolerated. Any heresy was
> > > > stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
> > >
> > > It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of
> the
> > > failed attempts to bloodily stamp out
> Christianity
> > > under the Emperors. The tradition of executing
> those
> > > who do not believe the same way you do is an old
> one
> > > -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did
> it
> > > end there.
> >
> > Salve, Dalmatice.
> >
> > I apologize, but certainly the romans didn't
> persecute those who
> held a
> > different religious belief than themselves? How
> then could they hold
> > together an empire stretching all across mare
> nostrum? If I've
> > understood things correctly, the thing about
> christianity that the
> > romans had a problem with, was the unwillingness
> of the christians
> to
> > accept the roman religion. They were free to
> believe in God, but
> they
> > refused to even acknowledge the roman gods, or the
> emperor. The
> > christians belief and their way of expressing it
> was what caused the
> > conflict, not any need on the romans' behalf to
> hunt down anyone
> with a
> > different opinion, which I haven't seen any proof
> that they ever
> did.
> >
> > Just my opinions, feel free to correct me.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Titus Octavius Pius,
> > Consiliarius Thules,
> > Praeco Anarei Thules,
> > Scriba to the Curator Araneum
> >
> > AKA Kristoffer From
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Si hoc signum legere potes,
> > operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
> > et fructuosis potiri potes.
> >
> > - Not-so-famous quotation
> >
> > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> > Version: 3.1
> > GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
> > o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
> > R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !y-
> > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rome - Byzantium
From:	martin p987654 <mp987654@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 05:17:47 -0700 (PDT)

How could the Christians believe in God and at the
same time acknowldge the Roman gods? This doesn't
make sense to me. In fact, it is contradictory. If
you are a Christian, you believe in one God only.
Thus, you cannot acknowldge the existence of Roman
gods because such acknowledgement would contradict
your belief in (only one)God.

I agree with the others. I think that Christians were
persecuted because they were doing something that was
not Roman: they believed in God and denied the ancient
beliefs in Roman gods, thereby making the empire less
Roman.

Gaius Julius Caesar

--- Kristoffer From <from@--------> wrote:
> Jeff Smith wrote:
> > > Christianity was the religio and no other was
> > > tolerated. Any heresy was
> > > stamped out bloodily. How Roman was that?
> >
> > It was VERY Roman. It was the consequence of the
> > failed attempts to bloodily stamp out Christianity
> > under the Emperors. The tradition of executing
> those
> > who do not believe the same way you do is an old
> one
> > -- it was not started by the Byzantines, nor did
> it
> > end there.
>
> Salve, Dalmatice.
>
> I apologize, but certainly the romans didn't
> persecute those who held a
> different religious belief than themselves? How then
> could they hold
> together an empire stretching all across mare
> nostrum? If I've
> understood things correctly, the thing about
> christianity that the
> romans had a problem with, was the unwillingness of
> the christians to
> accept the roman religion. They were free to believe
> in God, but they
> refused to even acknowledge the roman gods, or the
> emperor. The
> christians belief and their way of expressing it was
> what caused the
> conflict, not any need on the romans' behalf to hunt
> down anyone with a
> different opinion, which I haven't seen any proof
> that they ever did.
>
> Just my opinions, feel free to correct me.
>
> Vale,
>
> Titus Octavius Pius,
> Consiliarius Thules,
> Praeco Anarei Thules,
> Scriba to the Curator Araneum
>
> AKA Kristoffer From
>
> ---
>
> Si hoc signum legere potes,
> operis boni in rebus latinis alacribus
> et fructuosis potiri potes.
>
> - Not-so-famous quotation
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCS d- s:++> a-- C++>$ ULS++ P+ L++ E- W++(--) N
> o-- K- w--- !O M-- V-- PS->$ PE- Y+ PGP- t+@ 5- X-
> R+++>$ !tv- b+++>$ DI++++ D+ G e h! !r-->r+++ !y-
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Sodalitas Militarium
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 17:19:05 -0400 (EDT)

Honored Consuls Germanicus and Julianus, Senate Fathers, Militarium
Membership and Citizens of Nova Roma;

I come before you to thank the Consul's and the Nova Roma Senate for the
confidence that you have shown in the Sodalitas Militarium in being of
significant service to the Senate. Consul Germanicus' invitation to the
Miltarium to consider a further venue of service, Consul Julianus' very
generous comment relating to the growth and strength of the Militarium,
and the unamimous vote of confidence provided by the Senate to the
humble Proposal placed before you for consideration, is very much
appreciated by each and every member of the Militarium, and we are
thusly pledged to continue to find ways to serve the people and the
Senate of Nova Roma.

On behalf of the Militarium, I extend to you all of the extreme
appreciation of the Militarium for your very very kind encouragement,
compliments and outstanding support of our very few, poor and humble
efforts on behalf of Nova Roma.

For those new citizens of Nova Roma, the Sodalitas Militarium is devoted
to the study of the Roman Military Machine in all it's aspects. Any
citizen of Nova Roma who might wish to join us in these efforts is most
welcome. All that is required is a brief message asking to be enrolled
in the Sodalitas Militarium sent to the Militarium Beneficarius / Scriba
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo at:

trog99@--------

Very Respectfully;
Marcus Minucius Audens -- Praefectus Castorum -- Sodalitas Militarium --
Nova Roma

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] Rome - Byzantium
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 17:52:14 EDT

In a message dated 7/18/2001 1:17:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
mp987654@-------- writes:


> I think that Christians were
> persecuted because they were doing something that was
> not Roman: they believed in God and denied the ancient
> beliefs in Roman gods, thereby making the empire less
> Roman.
>

Salvete,
Since the Christian followed a mono God, the problem came about when the
Romans attempted to blend the Christian God into the theocracy. Rome
believed that all worship was possible under their tent, but you had to
recognize the cult of the Emperor, and pay homage to the Roman gods as well
as your own. The Christians refused this. Failure for a Roman citizen or
province member to pay homage was a crime against the state. Roman
magistrates saw this no less then treason against the state. This led to the
constant problems of Christians with Rome lasting over 300 years.
I have often wondered what would have happened if the any other God had been
recognized as the influence behind the victory of Milvian Bridge. How would
have history have been changed?
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] Nova Britannia Chat!
From:	"C. Minucius Hadrianus" <shinjikun@-------->
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 18:15:12 -0400

Salvete omnes,

Just a reminder that the weekly Nova Britannia chat will be held tonight
from 21:00 - 22:00 (EST or GMT -5:00) in the Nova Britannia mailing list
chat room at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NovaBritannia/chat I'd like to
start planning out next get-together (for August), so I encourage
all Nova Britanniae to stop in! (any other interested cives are welcome, of
course!).

Valete,

C. Minucius Hadrianus
Legatus of Massachusetts

ICQ# 28924742

"Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." - Vegetius



[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: Rome - Byzantium
From:	radams36@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:28:28 -0000

> Salvete,
>
> The Christians were being singled out because of their
anti-
> Roman political structure. Not because of their beliefs. Otherwise,
> why were other monothiestic ideals (alive and doing well in Roma
> antica, as they are flourishing now) not persecuted against?
> From the early aramaiac writtings, you can certainly see how anti-
> establishment early Christianity was.. Its there on the papyrus
that no
> one wants to talk about.Early Christians were opportunists like
> everyone else in history, as well as present.
> It was VERY Roman to PROTECT the ideals of the senate and
the
> people.And so they did.Being very inclusive toward other's
spiritual
> beliefs, Romans only did harm to those that would conspire toward
the
> eventual implement of their own ideologies.This (I belive) sparked
the
> expansion of Roma, by the way.Ask yourself why the early Christians
> were persecuted.And not the other monotheistic peoples (Italkim for
> instance).Then follow your rational thoughts toward reading the
history
> of Christianity and its early intentions.Which ultimately came to
> fruition.Constantine? Did he not see the sign as a political one?
Its
> obvious that he did...
> I mean no disrespect to the Christian god.I only question
his
> peoples motives.And there are many more questions about
Christianity
> that I wouldnt dare ask.. Because of that respect issue that we
Romans
> have inherrited.
>
> Semper Fidelis, A. Corvus Septimius

Salwete!

Speaking as a Christian, I appreciate your perspective, tact, and
respectful attitude. I've always believed in respecting the religious
beliefs of others no matter how different they are from my own - it's
an ideal I hold dear.

Valete!

R Palaeologvs





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

Subject:	[novaroma] Vindolanda Fund
From:	pcassia@--------
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2001 23:57:18 -0000

It is with great pleasure that I greet the news of the Senate's passage
of funds to assist the Vindolanda Trust.

For those who have missed my previous posts on the subject, Vindolanda
is a Roman site in the north of Britain which is managed by a private
trust and depends heavily on tourists for its income. This year, the
threat of foot-and-mouth disease has cut dangerously into the trust's
operating funds.

This site has yielded great quantities of artifacts that have taught us
the day-to-day details of life in an ancient Roman province. Among the
finds is the first known instance of writing in Latin by a woman (the
famous "birthday letter").

This Senate allocation, combined with contributions from Citizens, will
be sent to the Trust in the name of Nova Roma. Along with the help we
can offer, our contribution will also serve to fulfill our nonprofit
mission and help establish NR as an organization that is serious about
Roman scholarship and history.

This will be my last call for funds for this project. All contributions
are tax-deductible in the United States and will go directly to the
Vindolanda Trust. To donate, send a check or money order made out to
Nova Roma to P.O. Box 1897, Wells, ME 04090, with "Vindolanda" in the
message field, or donate by PayPal at http://www.novaroma.org/
aerarium_saturni/vindolanda/

I am happy to answer questions about this project, so please ask - and
please give! I will send the donation out Aug. 1.

Patricia Cassia





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