| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: To: Pontifex Maximus et Omnes |
| From: |
Maximina Octavia <myownq@--------> |
| Date: |
Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:15:37 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Marcus Cassius Julianus <cassius622@--------> wrote:
--- In novaroma@--------, Maximina Octavia <m--------q@--------> wrote:
Salvete Pontifex Maximus et Omnes:
I must say that I found your words compelling and wise. As a primarily on-line entity, there is the danger of broad interpretation as I have also been the recipient.
I personally pledge to you that in the future I will consider my posts more carefully, abstain from name calling and labeling (if I have not already) and call upon other Nova Romans to make this pledge to you, myself and Nova Roma.
Perhaps a personal committment by each one of us to you, ourselves and Nova Roma will help us to consider the seriousness of our posts and the effect that it has on each individual as well as Nova Roma herself.
I, also, would like to publicly apologize to anyone whose sensibilities have suffered or anyone's feelings I have hurt. Just as many of the rest of you, my intentions are for the betterment of Nova Roma. I pray that we can each lead by example.
Thank you for replying to my message and helping me to better understand your message, intentions and in elevating my thinking on this matter.
Valete, Maximina Octavia
Octavia:
> With all due respect, it amazes me that you think religion and
politics, historical or not can be discussed dispassionately. Buttons
are going to be pushed as in any debate of this kind.
Cassius:
There is a vast difference between being "passionate" and crossing
commonly recognized borders of acceptable behavior. When Citizens
start demanding that other Citizens be prosecuted legally, I would
say that line has been crossed.
What I am actually surprised at is that we seem to learn nothing as a
community from these episodes. It *is* possible to discuss topics
passionately without say, calling people "Nazis", (or saying that
they are acting like Nazis, or should be with the Nazis, etc.) Such
tactics are used deliberately to hurt others, and turn a public
debate into a personal argument every time.
> Octavia:
> I was brought up not to bring these things up with strangers at
social functions. Here at NR we have a lot of strangers with a wide
open "social" forum to discuss politics and religion. Respectfully,
what did you expect? Do you honestly think the ancient Roman forum
was any different?
Cassius respondit:
The ancient Roman forum WAS different, in that people communicated in
person. Each person's statements could be modified by any number of
physical clues; tone of voice, eye contact, facial expression. Here
we are judged only by the words we choose. If we deliberately refuse
to choose them carefully, or worse yet, choose do do others as much
verbal harm as possible, everyone suffers. In the ancient forum, an
argument was usually an isolated incident. Here, all other
conversation in essence stops.
> Octavia:
> The only problem is that, usually one person, writes in a hateful
manner and sets off a firestorm of controversy. And, some citizens
are sucked into the trap. If people would not react so fiercely to
this person, perhaps things could be kept to a low roar. Instead, we
constantly answer and acknowledge this person giving them far more
power than they deserve.
Cassius:
I agree completely! Back in the "old days", before eGroups or
YahooGroups, this sort of conversation was done on the Internet
Newsgroups. People used to love to "troll" those groups - popping
into a forum, saying outrageous nasty stuff, and then enjoying the
fireworks display! One group that never worked with was the Quaker
newsgroup. People would regularly stop in and post long diatribes
about how all Quakers were devils and going to hell, etc... and there
would *never* be a response. Nobody ever rose to the bait.
The "trolls", completely ignored, would go elsewhere. One of the most
admirable community responses I've ever seen.
> Octavia:
> IMHO, I have said it before and I will say again, there is a
distinct difference between merely strongly disagreeing and peddling
hate. Did Rome not fall from within and not without?
Cassius:
Both, I believe... gotta love them Huns, Ostrogoths and Visigoths!
Octavia:
> Thank you for your attention. I have the most fond and respectful
feelings toward you and others that agree with you. I can certainly
sympathize with your opinion. When all grow weary of this thread,
another will begin and I suspect will end up the same way.
>
Cassius:
I agree that this thread will pass away in due course. But a
particularly nasty outbreak of uncivilized exchange needs to be
recognized for what it is - a serious wound to Nova Roma.
People are calling for legal action. NO DOUBT some Citizens will
renounce their Citizenship over this simple list exchange, forgetting
that such things are temporary and will be forgotten in a matter of
days. The harm done to our community will neither be crippling nor
permanent... but it IS a shameful waste of our talents and effort.
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] "Foreign" relations |
| From: |
MIBAntT@-------- |
| Date: |
Sat, 28 Jul 2001 18:34:33 EDT |
|
Salve!
I'm not yet a citizen either, but I would like to suggest something. I think
the idea
of a web award is a clever one, and could be a show how much of an alliance
with Nova Roma an organization has. Perhaps the awards, rather than giving
all benefits at once, can be in various grades, like a "peregrini", which is
for organizations on friendly terms with Nova Roma, "municpium" for formal
allies (chosen by the senate), and "colonia" which would be for organizations
Nova Roma cooperates with on a regular basis (honored as such by the
comitae). More benefits would come with each progressive stage, perhaps that
$200 Senatrix Cassia suggested at a later stage. This would encourage
organizations to become more friendly with Nova Roma, and would reward their
friendship fittingly. Also, the decision to make an alliance would not be a
drastic one.
Just my two cents.
-M. Aurelius Spartacus
Hopeful Nova Roman
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Britain Town-Life (Part II) |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@-------- |
| Date: |
Sun, 29 Jul 2001 01:32:36 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Below is the second part of this study. The town-life is an important
view in the development of the Romano-British civilization, as it points
up the ability of the Empire to adapt not only in the aspects of
military warfare, but further to adapt to the needs of the provinces in
which the seeds of the Roman culture were to be planted.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The next term that we shall consider in our discussion is that of
"Oppidum." This is a much more vague and definately weaker term than
those descriptive words so far investigated. This term was a kind of
generalized word which was used to refer to all towns of any sort, from
the Roman chartered towns down to the rude "camps" of the native
Britons. In and of itself the above term cannot be applied precisely to
any real town-life area, although it was unquestionably used for that
purpose in general and imprecise description.
Although the Britain town-life came into being during the Roman Period
and under Roman Influence, it did not, as in Northern Gaul, come into
being in a definite Roman fashion. In actuality the Roman Municipality,
the town of Roman Citizens established under government charter and
administered on a definite Italian model was rare in Britain.
Specifically the municipalities numbered only five in all. One was
established at Camilodunum (Colchester) by Claudius and peopled with
time-expired soldiers. It seems to have been known as Colonia
Victricensis and was for awhile the capitol of the province. Another,
almost as early in date, was at Verulamium (St. Albans), and deserves
notice because it included no veterans but was probably a native town
which had become Romanized. The remaining three were connected with the
Army. Lindum (Lincoln)---still declaring it's colonial rank by it's
name--was probably founded when the Ninth Legion was pushed forward to
York, some time between AD 70 and 80. Glevan (Gloucester) one of whose
magisrates--a "decurio"--left an inscription at Bath, was planted under
Nerva (A.D. 96-98) and in all liklihood contained as it's first
inhabitants time-expired men from the Second Legion at Caerleon.
Lastly, York saw it's growth under the walls of the legionary fortress,
though across the Ouse River, a settlement which earned in later days
municipal rank, was located. York had become a "colonia" before A.D.
237 as proven by a Bordeaux inscriptioon discovered in 1921 showing that
Lincoln as well as York was in Lower Britain.
While these examples may be consdered as a fair representation of towns
which follow the "Italian Model," those towns of Narbonese Gaul had
many more. This area of Southern Gaul that was found along the Rhone
River Valley and the Mediterranean Coast, together with several parts of
Roman Africa (Tunis, Algeria and others, show far more extant examples.
The forms of policy adopted by the Empire in it's various provinces
differed as much as did the circumstances of the provinces themselves.
It may be observed that all the British municipalities save one owed
thier birth to the army. Verulamium excepted, Britain can show none of
those grants of municipal status to Romanized provincial centres on
non-military character, which were common elsewhere in the Empire in the
late first century, and into the second and third.
Nor did the five British towns flourish greatly. Of all there are
remains left, and there is no doubt as to the sites or titles. But the
remains vary in extent, and the inscriptions of the five barely total
six dozen, while those of any ordinary continental municipality often
run into hundreds. As a result, the contribution of these five British
towns need not be reckoned highly in thier contribution to our picture
of Romano-British civilization.
Reference:
--The Roman Occupation of Britain, Haverfield
Respectfully Submitted;
Marcus Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] "Foreign" relations |
| From: |
"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@--------> |
| Date: |
Sun, 29 Jul 2001 09:30:05 -0400 |
|
Salvete
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mark zona [mailto:pitdog2002@--------]
> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 3:55 PM
>
> I therefore mildly disfavor a specific criteria that
> all alliances must meet. But of coarse this too is a
> matter for the Senate to decide.
Understandable. However, the need for such specific criteria has been shown
by the fact that we are approached on average by one micronation a month,
asking for some sort of alliance, recognition, etc. Almost all of these are
what are sometimes referred to in micronational circles as "bugs"; small one
or two-man outfits with little more than a website and a flag done in
Photoshop. :-) Our current criterion for micronational recognition is that
the micronation in question be "a serious sovereignty project". To date,
that rather subjective criteria hasn't really worked to deter (or
encourage!) micronations, thus my asking the Senate for ideas for a clearer
set of criteria to which a prospective ally could be pointed.
I hope we'd all agree that formally recognizing such "bugs" (many of which
are also role-playing games, with mythical geographies, "armies", etc.)
would be against Nova Roma's best interests. We want to be taken seriously,
and recognizing some 14 year old who declares his bedroom to be a sovereign
nation with himself as King as our equal isn't the way to do that.
(By the way, anyone who is interested in micronationalism in and of itself
should check out http://www.micro-nations.org, which is a wonderful
resource.)
Next year in the Forum!
Valete,
Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] Visit to Ohio |
| From: |
jmath669642reng@-------- |
| Date: |
Sun, 29 Jul 2001 11:45:18 -0400 (EDT) |
|
Quintus Augustus, Sodales, Senators and Citizens;
I invite you also to meet with me at Lebanon, Ohio (about half way
between Dayton and Cincinnati - just off I-71) during my visit to my
daughter's family on the 9th through the 13th of August. I know that
such a trip would be a long one for most of you and certainly understand
if you cannot attempt it, but I wanted to extend the invitation should
you be interested.
Tribunus Africanus has indicated an interest, and we are planning a
meeting between us. Perhaps that meeting could be expanded into an
evening supper meeting of some sort.
Anyone else in the area of Lebanon, Ohio who would wish to meet with me
over that weekend I should be happy to accomodate as best I can. Please
let me know, and we shall be pleased to include you in our plans.
Respectfully;
Marcus Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary
|
| Subject: |
[novaroma] New Feature |
| From: |
"Lucius Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@--------> |
| Date: |
Sun, 29 Jul 2001 18:15:50 -0000 |
|
Salvete Omnes,
I have just added a new feature to the America Austrorientalis website.
We now have Google site search. Since the Provincial site is too new
to be included in Google's data base, I have set it up to search the
Nova Roma main site. Later I'll add the capability of searching the
Provincial website too.
So if you need to run a serch for information on Nova Roma's site then
drop by our site and check it out.
http://www.freehost.nu/members/austrorient/
Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus
Propraetor America Austrorientalis
|
| Subject: |
RE: [novaroma] "Foreign" relations |
| From: |
mark zona <pitdog2002@--------> |
| Date: |
Sun, 29 Jul 2001 08:14:05 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve!
Having been enlightened by Flavius Vedius with regards
to the situation at hand, i wish to reverse my
position and state that i would favor such a criteria
by which alliances may or may not be formed.
Thank you Germanicus!
Marcus Antonius Zeno
--- Flavius Vedius Germanicus
<germanicus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mark zona [mailto:pitdog2002@--------]
> > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 3:55 PM
> >
> > I therefore mildly disfavor a specific criteria
> that
> > all alliances must meet. But of coarse this too is
> a
> > matter for the Senate to decide.
>
> Understandable. However, the need for such specific
> criteria has been shown
> by the fact that we are approached on average by one
> micronation a month,
> asking for some sort of alliance, recognition, etc.
> Almost all of these are
> what are sometimes referred to in micronational
> circles as "bugs"; small one
> or two-man outfits with little more than a website
> and a flag done in
> Photoshop. :-) Our current criterion for
> micronational recognition is that
> the micronation in question be "a serious
> sovereignty project". To date,
> that rather subjective criteria hasn't really worked
> to deter (or
> encourage!) micronations, thus my asking the Senate
> for ideas for a clearer
> set of criteria to which a prospective ally could be
> pointed.
>
> I hope we'd all agree that formally recognizing such
> "bugs" (many of which
> are also role-playing games, with mythical
> geographies, "armies", etc.)
> would be against Nova Roma's best interests. We want
> to be taken seriously,
> and recognizing some 14 year old who declares his
> bedroom to be a sovereign
> nation with himself as King as our equal isn't the
> way to do that.
>
> (By the way, anyone who is interested in
> micronationalism in and of itself
> should check out http://www.micro-nations.org, which
> is a wonderful
> resource.)
>
> Next year in the Forum!
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
|
