Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Introduction
From:	bsmith3121@--------
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:04:15 EDT

Welcome. May you learn and thrive in Nova Roma!

Caius Titinius Varus

In a message dated Mon, 27 Aug 2001 4:17:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, otto_von_sitter@-------- writes:

> Hi! I'm a new citizen. My real name is CJ Robert Sitter, but my
> Roman name is Marcus Cornelius Tiberius. I first became interested
> in Roman history in my World History class and became interested
> again after I saw the movie Gladiator. I was actually searching for
> information reguarding Roman military uniforms when I stumbled upon
> Nova Roma. I am now proud to say I am a citizen of New Rome!
>
> Marcus Cornelius Tiberius
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Introduction
From:	Maximina Octavia <myownq@-------->
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:08:56 -0700 (PDT)

otto_von_sitter@-------- wrote:
Hi! I'm a new citizen. My real name is CJ Robert Sitter, but my
Roman name is Marcus Cornelius Tiberius.

Ave Tiberius,

Welcome to Nova Roma! Another Cornelius, my this familia just grows and grows (LOL) :)

Congratulations on a your choice, Pater Sulla is quite a kind, fair and knowledgeable person as I am certain you already know.

If there is anything I can personally do to assist you, please feel free to call upon me. Happy to have you aboard!

In the meantime, if you wish to know a little more about Maximina (me) I hope you will visit my store link at the Macellum or just click below: (shameless plug) I also welcome requests.

http://www.caesar-a.cityslide.com

Best wishes!

Vale, Maximina Octavia

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Vedia de Privatus Rebus
From:	Maximina Octavia <myownq@-------->
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:18:22 -0700 (PDT)

Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@--------> wrote:

Salve Pater M. Octavi,

Thank you for your hardwork in improving the Nova Roma website.

I have taken advantage of the current improvements and find that they work perfectly.

Thank you again for your fine service to Nova Roma and the countless hours and dedication you offer behind the scenes.

Vale, Maximina

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	Maximina Octavia <myownq@-------->
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:30:50 -0700 (PDT)

Ave, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo Álvarez),

Congratulations on your appointment! I wish you great success in your endeavors as I am certain that your heart and mind are atune to the best interests of Nova Roma.

Best wishes to you and your gens.

Vale, Maximina Octavia

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


Subject:	[novaroma] A call to M. Appolonius Formosanus
From:	"Uriel Storm" <uriel@-------->
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:19:36 -0500

Ave, Formosanus,
My AIM is URielstorm
my ICQ # is 120712978

Please contact me.
THanks
=^.^=

Uriel Storm
The Perfect Blue
'A friend in need's a friend in deed
My Japanese is better..
My friend confessed she passed the test
and we will never sever'

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: From One Paterfamilias to Another
From:	antoniuscorvusseptimius@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:15:03 -0000

Salve, Since this is a public post directed at one person, I feel
that
I should respond as well.
The following are assumptions based on heresay. Reading past posts
have
made that obvious to me.

I have made some statements following each "provision"

>
> CONCORDIA INTER GENTES CORNELIAM ET APOLLONIAM
> Based on these provisions:
>
> I. L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and M. Apollonius Formosanus
> agree to work with each other and with other interested
> parties to revise current legislation so that both agree
> that it no longer contains discriminatory or intrusive
> provisions with respect to sexual minorities.

ACS: You have added words to the leges again, sir. This piece of
legislature does not contain the following: "discriminatory
or intrusive provisions with respect to sexual minorities"
This may be for another subject... but sexual minorities? Whats that?
I certainly would not consider a person of a different sexual
preference a minority. Since respectively.. There are a lot more than
you give that personal preference credit for.

>> II. L. Cornelius Sulla Felix and M. Apollonius Formosanus
> agree that all personal offences between them will be
> apologised for mutually and definitively forgiven by each
> on the day the above legislative revisions take legal
> effect.

ACS: A personal issue between you and LCSF. I'm sure he would like to
read this in his email inbox.

> III. The Gens Cornelia and Gens Apollonia from the above
> date will also collaborate to create practices and
> institutions of mutual friendship and co-operation between
> their members.

ACS: Not all Apollini (sorry if I misspelled), and not all Corneli
have attack eachother. If there is, I'm sure that they are capable of
extebding their hands for the sake of concordia. On their own.

> IV. The Gens Cornelia and Gens Apollonia from the above
> date will work together to share their respective political
> concerns through direct contacts,

ACS: Very good! This should have been implimented with this, your
well
written post.

and will endeavour to
> identify mutually acceptable "win-win" solutions to
> conflicts between the Patrician and Plebeian orders, and
> the Senate and the People, and to further the acceptance of
> such solutions by the whole Nova Roman community, so that
> the Two Gentes instead of serving to divide the nation will
> take the leadership role in uniting it.
> _____________________________
>
> That is my proposal to you, Sulla. You know that we
> started out well, and if we learn to work together and are
> both here in Nova Roma ten years from now, this year and a
> half of enmity will only be a small part of our history
> together. There is time to build something better beween
> ourselves and our gentes than what has been for this little
> while. Let's not become too attached to the habits of
> attacking each other as our chief pleasures in Nova Roma,
> because there are better ones.
>
> This is a point in our personal, gens and national history
> where what the two of us do can make a historic difference
> for the better. It would be very easy for me to wax
> eloquent about how you hid your changed views and
> intentions towards your legislation just to score points
> against me. But I choose to concentrate on how you came in
> the end to see what was right because you really are a
> caring human being at heart, it seems. I will give you the
> credit for that, despite your treatment of me and my
> lasting regret at what Marius had to go through.
>
> If you have any doubts about accepting the CONCORDIA OFFER
> as it stands above, please talk to me about it and please
> consult with your gentiles before rejecting it. I think
> they too have a big stake in seeing peace between our
> gentes. Surely we can do better than just have a state of
> "non-vendetta", can't we?

ACS: Forgive, but I feel a hand offered in concordia, in a crowd,
loses
effect.

>
> Our two gentes have stood out as representatives of the
> Patrician/Senatorial viewpoint and of the Plebeian/Popular
> viewpoint.

Popular view point? How can you pinpoint popular view points?
Especially with whats been occuring here?

If we could remove the obstacles between us that
> have hampered communications and consultations, we could
> make a big contribution to a general Concordia in Nova
> Roma, such as has not been possible for a long time because
> of the unbridgeable moral gap between us. That would not be
> enough to solve all the political problems here, but it
> would be significantly helpful.
>
> I await your reply, and if it takes a day or two to
> consult with your gentiles, I shall understand. And I must
> say that I would rather be united in amicable relations
> with the many fine and likeable Cornelians you have
> gathered around you than to have lasting enmity between our
> gentes mar our relationships.
>
> The big obstacle has melted away. Let us recognise that
> fact and seize peace together. Such a chance may not come
> soon again if we do not take advantage of it now. And I
> hope that all responsible people in Nova Roma will want to
> see his. By your statesmanlike agreement, I ask you to make
> it possible.

ACS: A noble request. But again, should have been offered to LCSF in
private. And then brought out for all to see. This, sir reaks of
spectacle.

"Qui decit benefictum taceat; narret qui accepit"
"Let him who gives favor be silent; let him who has recieved it, tell
it" - Seneca

In closing, I hope that your intention of concordia be
honorable
enough to make personal peace between yourself (MAF) and to Censor
Sulla. Wich I am sure that your intention is.As for the rest of
Apollinii and Cornelii (forgive misspellings), I am absolutley
certain
that they can handle themselves with respect toward eachother.

Valete!
A. Corvus Septimius


Subject:	[novaroma] A call to armistice
From:	"Uriel Storm" <uriel@-------->
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:34:22 -0500

Avete Omnes,
As one who is personally affected by this public conflict, I call to an end of all public debate about it, until something serious may be done about the lex. Look, regardless of anyone's feelings about this or those who've been affected by it in the past, the only one currently (That I am aware of) affected by this is me. Yes, I am the only open transgendered person in Nova Roma who is currently affected by all of this. Yes, *I* call for an end to this, because frankly, *I* am tired of hearing about it... from EVERYBODY.
Look, unless you are in a direct position to do something about this lex, unjust or not, then shut up! YOU are not being affected, hence, YOU have no need to complain about this.
I have tried to contact M. Appolonius Formosanus several times, both publically and privately, and he has ignored my entreaties, well, no matter. I am satisfied that he is doing nothing more than grandstanding, and has only his ego in mind with his decriment of Nova Roma.

There is much more that I would like to say, but, given the nature of this list, I shall refrain.

Decius Cornelius Sepulchatius
Gens Cornelius
Upset Civis
=^.^=

Uriel Storm
The Perfect Blue
'A friend in need's a friend in deed
My Japanese is better..
My friend confessed she passed the test
and we will never sever'

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Introduction
From:	burdigalus@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:07:13 -0000

Gaius Etcheverius Burdigalus Novoromanis S.P.D
Salve,
I am not yet a citizen of Nova Roma but I hope to be soon. I have
been lurking on this list for the past few days and I thought I
should introduce myself.
I am fascinated by the Roman republic, although it is a relatively
new fascination for me. My exposure to it has been primarily through
movies, novels and what little information I have so far gleaned from
the internet. My knowledge of the ancient republic is still quite
lacking but I intend to remedy that as quickly as I can. This
endeavour to create a new micronation is a truly ambitious one. I
hope to be able to apply what meagre skills I possess in whatever
capacity I can to be of some help in the building of this community
and of Nova Roma.

Valete,
G. Etcheverius Burdigalus


Subject:	[novaroma] Annoucement: Mock Trial to commence next week
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:57:54 EDT

Salvete. novaroma@--------
In DEC 1998 (2752 AUC) Lucius Marconius Romulus was expelled from Nova Roma
by unanimous Senate vote. But what if he had appealled the sentence and
demanded trial by assembly as was his right as a Roman citizen?
Since this never happened, speculation has to say that the Senate's sentence
would have been upheld. Now citizens here is your chance to see Roman trial
procedure
in action. I'd rather use a mock trial to determine procedural problems,
then have a real citizen facing a decision. The Marconius case is perfect
for this.

The illustrious Censor Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus who was Praetor Urbanus in
2752, will prosecute, and noted Praetor Caius Flavius Diocletianus will be
Marconius' advocate.
We will need to impanel at least 35 citizens to act as iudices, if you want
to be a juror, please contact me off list at my address. qfabiusmaxmi@--------
iudices will listen to the facts, the advocate's defense, then vote if the
accused is guilty and deserves expulsion or should the Senate's decision be
overturned.

In reality both prosecutor and advocate would be allowed to disallow iudices,
according to the lex Vatinia of 59 BCE, however I wonder if we will get 35,
let alone if they are prejudiced against the case.

I wanted Cassius Nerva to "act" as Marconius, but he has other duties, so I
would like another citizen to step in to play the part. I'll brief you about
Marconius so you can play the part.

In order not to confuse the citizens here on the list, before any post having
to do with the trial the phase "Mock Trial" will be before the title to avoid
confusion.

This will be an experience for us all. I hope an educational and favorable
one.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] "Mock Trial" Iudices needed.
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:14:25 EDT

Citizens of Rome
Yesterday, a.d. IV Kal.JAN, 2752 since the founding of Rome, the Roman Senate
has condemned the citizen Lucius Marconius Romulus to expelled from Rome
permanently for treason against the state.
Lucius Marconius Romulus has invocked his right of appeal against the Senate
to the centurius comitia. However the Senate has decided that he be judged
by citizen Iudices. Therefore it is decreed:
The Senate appoints Q. Fabius Maximus as Iudex (let's pretend I was a Senator
at the time, which I wasn't.)
Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus, Praetor Urbanus, as prosecutor.
Caius Flavius Diocletianus, Advocate

Roman citizens are requested to apply as Iudices (jurors) by contacting the
Iudex at his office.
The trial is scheduled to began next week.
Valete!

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


Subject:	Fw: [novaroma] Re: Are we at it again? Yes indeed.
From:	"Tiberius 'Sokarus' Apollonius Callias" <hadescallias@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:59:53 +0200

Salvete
Who said Sulla had won.I have been called a lot of things but never a spoiled child before so who ever wrote this, hear me out, and this goes out also for the one who wrote that i wasn't completely honoust. What Sulla forgot to mentioned wich played in his favour, but nobody mentioned, is the fact that when i first received the lettre i complied to it and said that i will change my name wich i put out of the mailing list of the gens. When i found out that many others are using invalid roman names, than i start to protest not at the beginning and i think that it should be know that i don't hate the republic or the Senate, just Sulla. He is a backstabbing, homophobic Senator and censor who claims all good things but dislikes them in private. He has a two faces(janusface): one that is shown to the public and another that is shown in private.
Valete
Tiberius Apollonius Callias

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


Subject:	Re: Fw: [novaroma] Cornelius Sulla is not what Tiberius claims.
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:18:20 EDT

In a message dated 8/28/01 1:01:54 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
hadescallias@-------- writes:

> He is a backstabbing, homophobic Senator

Salvete...
Though this is more a job for the Curator of the list, to tell you to cut the
Injuria, I have to say that I have known Lucius Cornelius Sulla for three
years and have always known him to be a straight shooter. He tells it to you
up front. It might not be what people want to hear, but he is direct.
Lucius Cornelius would give you the shirt off his back, if he felt you needed
it. As for homophobic, where in Hades do you get that? He has several gay
friends so he is far from homophobic. Infact if you continue in this line of
accusation, I am to wonder if you are not what you speak of? You seem to be
very fond of the word...
Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Difference between Oligarchy and Aristocracy
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:42:28 -0700

Ave Citizens of Nova Roma,

Many words of a political nature have been thrown out and many people
might not understand truly what the subtle differences might be. I have
researched this via the web and found a very good website that will
explain why many of us have taken offense.

Oligarchy - Any system of government in which virtually all political
power is held by a very small number of wealthy but otherwise
unmeritorious people who shape public policy primarily to benefit
themselves financially through direct subsidies to their agricultural
estates or business firms, lucrative government contracts, and
protectionist measures aimed at damaging their economic competitors --
while displaying little or no concern for the broader interests of the
rest of the citizenry. "Oligarchy" is also used as a collective term to
denote all the individual members of the small corrupt ruling group in
such a system. The term always has a negative or derogatory connotation
in both contemporary and classical usage, in contrast to aristocracy
(which sometimes has a derogatory connotation in modern usage, but never
in classical).

Aristocracy - A privileged social class whose members possess
disproportionately large shares of a society's wealth, social prestige,
educational attainment and political influence, with these advantages
having been acquired principally through gift or inheritance from a long
line of similarly privileged and cultivated ancestors. The term refers
also to a form of government in which the state is effectively
controlled by the members of such a class. The term tends to have a
somewhat unsavory or derogatory connotation today in the light of
democratic theories, but in classical political philosophy it meant rule
by "the best people" of the society, who were expected to feel a
paternalistic concern for the humbler members of the society that would
keep them from ruling in a purely self-seeking fashion.

I have taken these definitions from this website:
http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/index.html?http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/o.html

This is an excellent website for Political Science.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Mock Trial
From:	Jeff Smith <dalmaticus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:11:10 -0700 (PDT)

> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:57:54 EDT
> From: QFabiusMaxmi@--------
> Subject: Annoucement: Mock Trial to commence next
> week
>
> Salvete. novaroma@--------
> In DEC 1998 (2752 AUC) Lucius Marconius Romulus was
> expelled from Nova Roma
> by unanimous Senate vote. But what if he had
> appealled the sentence and
> demanded trial by assembly as was his right as a
> Roman citizen?
> Since this never happened, speculation has to say
> that the Senate's sentence
> would have been upheld. Now citizens here is your
> chance to see Roman trial
> procedure
> in action. I'd rather use a mock trial to determine
> procedural problems,
> then have a real citizen facing a decision. The
> Marconius case is perfect
> for this.
>
> The illustrious Censor Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus
> who was Praetor Urbanus in
> 2752, will prosecute, and noted Praetor Caius
> Flavius Diocletianus will be
> Marconius' advocate.
> We will need to impanel at least 35 citizens to act
> as iudices, if you want
> to be a juror, please contact me off list at my
> address. qfabiusmaxmi@--------
> iudices will listen to the facts, the advocate's
> defense, then vote if the
> accused is guilty and deserves expulsion or should
> the Senate's decision be
> overturned.
>
> In reality both prosecutor and advocate would be
> allowed to disallow iudices,
> according to the lex Vatinia of 59 BCE, however I
> wonder if we will get 35,
> let alone if they are prejudiced against the case.
>
> I wanted Cassius Nerva to "act" as Marconius, but he
> has other duties, so I
> would like another citizen to step in to play the
> part. I'll brief you about
> Marconius so you can play the part.
>
> In order not to confuse the citizens here on the
> list, before any post having
> to do with the trial the phase "Mock Trial" will be
> before the title to avoid
> confusion.
>
> This will be an experience for us all. I hope an
> educational and favorable
> one.
>
> Valete
> Q. Fabius Maximus

Salve,

My understanding is that Lucius Marconius Romulus is a
real human being, not an actor in a story. Has this
person given his consent to this show trial?

L. Cornelius Dalmaticus

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

"Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies out of the trunk." -- anonymous

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Mock Trial
From:	Jeff Smith <dalmaticus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:11:10 -0700 (PDT)


Subject:	[novaroma] Endorsement of the Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus
From:	"Uriel Storm" <uriel@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:27:57 -0500

Avete Omnes;

I shall dispense with too much formality, even though this is a public letter directed at the entirety of Nova Roma. In reviewing the Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus I have found a clause in the lex that not only do I agree with, but endorse completely. This clause is quoted below:

(begin quote)

4. The gender of the name is to be consistent. Each part is to agree with all others in gender, and with the sex of the citizen requesting the name change.

C. A citizen who wishes to change the gender of his name counter to that dictated by his sex must present, in support of his application, proof of acceptance of the contrary sex by an authority of a macronation, state, or municipality. In other words, if the applicant is physically a man and has a form of macronational or municipal identification listing his sex as female, or is officially recognized as a woman in his country of macronational citizenship, then he may use a feminine name in Nova Roma.

1. An exception to this rule is allowed in the case of transsexual citizens who are discussing surgical sex alteration with a health care provider or undergoing other medical and psychological treatment in preparation for such an operation. In these instances, documentation pertaining to health care provider(s) may be required of the applicant

(end quote)

In Effect, Quirites, this will weed out the so-called 'role-playing' element that this lex was intended to. If one is serious, as I have been for most of my life, about changing one's gender, then most of the time one has a therapist, and the clause stated above DOES INDEED INCLUDE THIS MEASURE.
This satisfies my concerns about the lex. I have read and comply with the exemptions listed in the Lex Cornelia et Maria de Mutandis Nominibus.

With this, further, I petition to change my name and the gender by which I am known in Nova Roma. I understand that this will take place when the Censors have receieved and reviewed the documentation which will be provided by my health care provider.

Vale,

Decia Cornelia Sepulchatia
=^.^=

Uriel Storm
The Perfect Blue
'A friend in need's a friend in deed
My Japanese is better..
My friend confessed she passed the test
and we will never sever'

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <manius_constantinus_serapio@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:00:59 -0000

AVE

congratulation to Gnaeus Salix Astur for his appointment!

OPTIME VALE MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] A call to armistice
From:	"Maia Apollonia Pica" <mjarc@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:09:52 +0200

Salve, Deci Corneli,

If you've tried to reach MAF on an instant messanger or email for a
short time now, then probably you haven't received an answer yet
because there is a long queue there... ;-)

I think no one has the right to try and "use you" to champion a
political cause. But "transgendered people whowould like to change
their name" are potentially a group, even if for now you are alone in
it. Theoretically there might be others out there in NR who are being
quiet now because they aren't as open about being TG as you are.
Theoretically this lex might discourage people from joining. And in a
very practical way, it will matter a lot soon, when there are not one
thousand but 20 thousand citizens (yes I think we are moving in this
direction).

You wrote:

> As one who is personally affected by this public conflict, I call to
> an end of all public debate about it, until something serious may be
> done about the lex.

It's happening now, between Drusis and Sulla and I hope my pater if
they have in fact allowed him into this informal committee as Drusus
suggested before. But a lex must be voted on, and public debates are
just a preliminary to that. Yes I agree with you, too much mail is
generated on this. Hopefully the discussion will move away from the
ML now, but I also believe it should be back on the ML before we
vote.

> Look, unless you are
> in a direct position to do something about this lex, unjust or not,
> then shut up! YOU are not being affected, hence, YOU have no need to
> complain about this.

We are all affected, indirectly of course. I might have a Roman tg
friend here in Venedia (I don't). Marius' friends might want to ask
him back. (I think you mentioned this yourself. Not a good idea I
think, but it is theoretically possible.)

I have tried to contact M. Appolonius Formosanus
> several times, both publically and privately, and he has ignored my
> entreaties, well, no matter.

Vide supra

I am satisfied that he is doing nothing
> more than grandstanding, and has only his ego in mind with his
> decriment of Nova Roma.

Your opinion. You have a right to this, just like M. Minucius Audens,
who calls him a man without honour. I believe both these opinions are
very wrong. From our personal relationship and the work we do
together in the province, and even this ML debate which you
understandably find so tiring and annoying, I must say I haven't met
many people who can be so selfless and honourable. But we certtainly
don't have to agree on that.

Here is the main point of my message: MAF annoys people with his
language and style of being, and his constant criticism. Corneli,
this is good! I mean, criticism is needed. Much more than praise, and
the good things in NR get enough praise from everybody.

Please, as you read that "One Pater to another" message, try to skip
any annoyance it may evoke in you and see the intention behind it.
MAF is terribly serious about wanting peace with your pater and this
suggestion that our gentes should co-operate is very reasonable.
Please support it if you can.

Of course MAF's relationship with Censor Sulla is their private
matter, and can't determine my relationships with any of the Corneli.
But I would be very happy if them guys could agree to work together,
because this woulf give us some better grounds for a friendship.

(Please, if this message sounds silly to you, blame me and not any of
my gentiles. I haven't consulted it with anybody.)

(The TG person we were talking about said he would drop you a note.)

Optime vale,
Maia Apollonia


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Introduction
From:	"Gaius Marcius Coriolanus" <coriolanus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:36:38 -0000

G. Marcius Coriolanus G.Etcheverii Burdigalo S.P.D.

Welcome home. I'm sure that you can improve your knowledge of Roman
Republic rapidly here.

You can also improve your knowledge of verbal combat as you can see
in last cornelian/apollonian mail war.

Ave et Vale

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus
Paterfamilias Gentis Marciae

--- In novaroma@--------, burdigalus@-------- wrote:
> Gaius Etcheverius Burdigalus Novoromanis S.P.D
> Salve,
> I am not yet a citizen of Nova Roma but I hope to be soon. I have
> been lurking on this list for the past few days and I thought I
> should introduce myself.
> I am fascinated by the Roman republic, although it is a
relatively
> new fascination for me. My exposure to it has been primarily
through
> movies, novels and what little information I have so far gleaned
from
> the internet. My knowledge of the ancient republic is still quite
> lacking but I intend to remedy that as quickly as I can. This
> endeavour to create a new micronation is a truly ambitious one. I
> hope to be able to apply what meagre skills I possess in whatever
> capacity I can to be of some help in the building of this community
> and of Nova Roma.
>
> Valete,
> G. Etcheverius Burdigalus


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	"Gaius Marcius Coriolanus" <coriolanus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:41:37 -0000

Salve

Congratulations to your new office.

Ave et Vale

Gaius Marcius Coriolanus

--- In novaroma@--------, Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
> I, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo Álvarez) do hereby solemnly swear to
> uphold the honor of Nova Roma, and to act always in the best
interests
> of the people and the Senate of Nova Roma.
>
> As a magistrate of Nova Roma, I, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo
Álvarez)
> swear to honor the Gods and Goddesses of Rome in my public dealings,
> and to pursue the Roman Virtues in my public and private life.
>
> I, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo Álvarez) swear to uphold and defend
the
> Religio Romana as the State Religion of Nova Roma and swear never to
> act in a way that would threaten its status as the State Religion.
>
> I, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo Álvarez) swear to protect and defend
the
> Constitution of Nova Roma.
>
> I, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo Álvarez) further swear to fulfill the
> obligations and responsibilities of the office of Triumvir Novae
Romae
> Academiae in Thule to the best of my abilities.
>
> On my honor as a Citizen of Nova Roma, and in the presence of the
Gods
> and Goddesses of the Roman people and by their will and favor, do I
> accept the position of Triumvir Novae Romae Academiae in Thule and
all
> the rights, privileges, obligations, and responsibilities attendant
> thereto.
>
>
> =====
> Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
> Gnaeus Salix Astur.
> Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
> Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo!
Messenger
> http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN [Religio Romana] ante diem V Kalendas Septembres (August 28)
From:	"Antonio Grilo" <amg@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:44:22 +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 aniversary of the dedication of the temple of Sol and Luna near
the Circus Maximus. Tacitus refers to it as 'vetus aedes Solis ada Circum' ,
but it only became important when Games were added to its celebration in the
IIIrd century AD. Tertullian says that the Circus was primarily dedicated to
Sol, whose temple was in the middle part of it; the statue of Sol (probably
riding his quadriga) was on the top of the temple since it was not thought
right to pay sacred honours under a roof to the god whom men have in the
open above them.

The month Sextilis is sacred to Ceres. It's name was later changed to
Augustus in honour of Emperor Octavius Caesar Augustus.

Dii vos bene ament,
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex


Subject:	[novaroma] At it again
From:	ksterne@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:28:52 -0000

Salve Tiberi Apolloni ,

>>...i don't hate the republic or the Senate, just Sulla. He is a
backstabbing, homophobic Senator and censor who claims all good
things but dislikes them in private. He has a two faces(janusface):
one that is shown to the public and another that is shown in
private.<<

I don't wish to expand or prolong this issue, but I feel I must
respond. I have only known Censor Sulla for 6 months, but I have
never found him to be anything but helpful and genuinely interested
in our Republic. I have never know him to make any statements that
would indicate he is homophobic, and he has only shown one face to me.

Lucius Cornelius may sometimes seem rash, for I believe he is a very
passionate person, but he couldn't possibly be as Machiavellian as
some seem to think. He is certainly not deserving of your "hate".

Perhaps you should join us on in the "Back Alley" and see a more
casual side of Lucius Cornelius. You might change your mind.
(Caution the BA is "R" rated).

With all respect.

Vale,
Gaius Popillius Laenas
Robur et Decus


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Are we at it again? Yes indeed.
From:	Jeff Smith <dalmaticus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:00:03 -0700 (PDT)

> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 04:20:01 -0700
> From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> <alexious@-------->
> Subject: Re: Are we at it again? Yes indeed.

> Salve censor.
> You know what, i'm keeping the name Sokarus. There
> are other people on
> the list that don't have their names registered as
> roman names so bug
> them and than come to me when you still alive. There
> is no
> way you can deny my application as a citizen because
> i have an invalid
> praenomen. Thats bullshit. If you don't like it,
> tough. That is the way
> things are going these days and nothing you will say
> is gonna change
> that.
> Vale
> Sokarus Apollonius Callias
>
> AND
>
> Salve
> I will comply out oif respect for the edict and not
> for you. My official
> roman praenomen will be Tiberius and what the rest
> is concerned, you can
> shove it up your ass.You already created a new enemy
> and if you don't
> like
> it, than go play with yourself.
> Vale
> Tiberius Apollonius Callias

Salve,

I have not participated in this debate, nor do I
intend to now; however, no one should speak this way
to an officer of the republic, ever, for any reason,
regardless of whether or not they agree. It is just
flat wrong.

I call upon the author to apologize.

L. Cornelius Dalmaticus

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

"Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies out of the trunk." -- anonymous

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: Fw: [novaroma] Re: Are we at it again? Yes indeed.
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:52:21 -0700 (PDT)

--- Tiberius 'Sokarus' Apollonius Callias
<hadescallias@--------> wrote:
> Salvete
> Who said Sulla had won.I have been called a lot of
> things but never a spoiled child before so who ever
> wrote this, hear me out, and this goes out also for
> the one who wrote that i wasn't completely honoust.
> What Sulla forgot to mentioned wich played in his
> favour, but nobody mentioned, is the fact that when
> i first received the lettre i complied to it and
> said that i will change my name wich i put out of
> the mailing list of the gens. When i found out that
> many others are using invalid roman names, than i
> start to protest not at the beginning and i think
> that it should be know that i don't hate the
> republic or the Senate, just Sulla. He is a
> backstabbing, homophobic Senator and censor who
> claims all good things but dislikes them in private.
> He has a two faces(janusface): one that is shown to
> the public and another that is shown in private.
> Valete
> Tiberius Apollonius Callias
>

So you went to the Apollonia mail list? I Guess that
explains your attitude, after going to such an
"unbiased" source for information on the Censor.

It also makes me wonder just who the two faced person
is, when we see your Pater making peace offers towards
Sulla, while you are rycycling his old slanders
against Sulla. Or if your Pater is honestly trying to
make peace, then I suggest you look in the mirror for
ths Backstabber, because that is what you have just
done to his peace efforts.

L. Sicinius Drusus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:11:34 -0700 (PDT)

Salve, Maximina Octavia.

--- Maximina Octavia <myownq@--------> wrote:
>
>
> Ave, Gnaeus Salix Astur (Rodrigo Álvarez),
>
> Congratulations on your appointment! I wish you great success in
> your endeavors as I am certain that your heart and mind are atune to
> the best interests of Nova Roma.
>
> Best wishes to you and your gens.
>
> Vale, Maximina Octavia

Thank you very much. I will try to honour the confidence you grant me.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	ksterne@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:23:14 -0000

Salve Gnae Salix,

Let me add my congratulations to one of the coolest heads and most
polite cives of NR. Good luck in your duties.

Vale,
Gaius Popillius Laenas


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] "Mock Trial" Iudices needed.
From:	Shane Evans <marcusafricanus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:33:15 -0700 (PDT)

I will be willing to serve.

M. Scipio Africanus
Legatus, Lacus Magni Orientalis

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:34:15 -0700 (PDT)

Salve, M'. Constantine Serapio.

--- Manius Constantinus Serapio
<manius_constantinus_serapio@--------> wrote:
> AVE
>
> congratulation to Gnaeus Salix Astur for his appointment!
>
> OPTIME VALE MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO

Multas gratias tibi ago, Serapio.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:35:33 -0700 (PDT)

Salve, C. Marci Coriolane.

--- Gaius Marcius Coriolanus <coriolanus@--------> wrote:
> Salve
>
> Congratulations to your new office.
>
> Ave et Vale
>
> Gaius Marcius Coriolanus

Thank you very much.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Oath of Office (was Edictum Propraetoricium XXIV about the Appointment of a new Triumvir Academia Novae Romae in Thule.)
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:41:20 -0700 (PDT)

Salve, C. Popilli Laenas.

--- ksterne@-------- wrote:
> Salve Gnae Salix,
>
> Let me add my congratulations to one of the coolest heads and most
> polite cives of NR. Good luck in your duties.
>
> Vale,
> Gaius Popillius Laenas

Thank you very much, C. Popilli; both for the congratulations and the
compliment :-).

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Fw: [novaroma] Re: Are we at it again? Yes indeed.
From:	"Mike Rasschaert" <hadescallias@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:52:56 -0000

Salve
> So you went to the Apollonia mail list? I Guess that
> explains your attitude, after going to such an
> "unbiased" source for information on the Censor.
>
> It also makes me wonder just who the two faced person
> is, when we see your Pater making peace offers towards
> Sulla, while you are rycycling his old slanders
> against Sulla. Or if your Pater is honestly trying to
> make peace, then I suggest you look in the mirror for
> ths Backstabber, because that is what you have just
> done to his peace efforts.
Everyone is telling me that namecalling does not belong here. I said
what i said to get it of my mind and thats final. I was totaly acting
on my one and had nothing to do what so ever with the other Apollonii
so don't harass them, harass me of the list wich i intended to do in
the first place until the good censor decided to bring into public so
that everyone can see it. Isn't he provocing than when he did that.
He should kept this argument between us and not a public one. writing
in email is one thing but showing it to everyone to see, is
provocation on your part even though that might not be entirly the
case. sorry if my english is'nt that good, it is not something anyone
should attack.
Vale
Tiberius Apollonius Callias


Subject:	[novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	loos@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:40:12 -0300

Ancient Rome used to live under a mixed system:
Aritocratic through the senate (not the centuries)
Monarchic through the imperium conceded to the magistrates
Democratic "geometric" (cf Thales) through the centuries (sometimes
called oligarchic when the geometric coefficient was very high)
Democratic "arithmetic" (athenian) through the CP.

Modern democracy (even in the USA) is mixed system between ancient
arithmetic
democracy and monarchy (elected magistrates with large powers).

NovaRoma comes close to pure oligarchy because of the choosen century
sistem:
Elected Magistrates and Former Magistrates are nearly alone in their
centuries and therefore have more political power in order to reelect
themselves. It would in fact be better to have a wealth based century
system, at least this way you could gain political power without having
it in the first place.
The democratic part is near to inexistent, when the tribunes tried to
propose laws they were called "anti-democratic".

In Ancient Rome most new citizens joined the 1st Class (because most of
them were wealthy).
In Ancient Rome freed slaves could join directly in the 1st class (many
were wealthy) because they became directly citizens (which was not the
case in Athens for instance).
Here all new citizens join the 5th class.

We clearly have an oligarchic micro-nation, much more oligarchic that
Rome was.

Manius Villius Limitanus


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:19:14 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Mani Vili,

> Elected Magistrates and Former Magistrates are nearly alone in their
> centuries and therefore have more political power in order to reelect
> themselves.

That's a temporary effect, resulting from the long time between
reallocations. If the number of centuries per class remains constant
when centuries are reallocated again, there won't be any centuries -
even in the first class - with less than three people.

> It would in fact be better to have a wealth based century
> system, at least this way you could gain political power without having
> it in the first place.

I suspect the outcry against that would be tremendous if we tried it...

> The democratic part is near to inexistent, when the tribunes tried to
> propose laws they were called "anti-democratic".

The main reason for the protest against tribune Piscinus' proposals
was because they were announced for the first time only two days
before the election. There was never an effort made to gather
citizen input or discuss the proposals in the open; they came
as a complete surprise.

His former colleague, Tribune Labienus, has since enacted a law
that prevents that sort of abuse.

> Here all new citizens join the 5th class.

New citizens have been placed in the third through fifth classes. In
the future, most will probably start in the fifth class, but can climb
out of it quickly - century reallocation will now be simple and
automated, and can happen as often as necessary - such as a few
days before the start of each and every election.

Vale, Octavius.

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

"... one of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that,
lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of
their C programs." -- Robert Firth


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:33:07 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes.

--- Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@--------> wrote:
> Salve Mani Vili,
>
> > Elected Magistrates and Former Magistrates are nearly alone in
> their
> > centuries and therefore have more political power in order to
> reelect
> > themselves.
>
> That's a temporary effect, resulting from the long time between
> reallocations. If the number of centuries per class remains constant
> when centuries are reallocated again, there won't be any centuries -
> even in the first class - with less than three people.

I have a few questions about the Comitia Centuriata. I have the
impression that the censores are free to assign a number of centuries
to each class as they see fit. Is this impression correct?

Anyway, it is true that an abnormal (and antihistorical) level of
reelection does occur.

> > It would in fact be better to have a wealth based century
> > system, at least this way you could gain political power without
> having
> > it in the first place.
>
> I suspect the outcry against that would be tremendous if we tried
> it...

I agree with you, M. Octavi. There would be a huge outcry. And, in my
humble opinion, righteously so.

> > The democratic part is near to inexistent, when the tribunes tried
> to
> > propose laws they were called "anti-democratic".
>
> The main reason for the protest against tribune Piscinus' proposals
> was because they were announced for the first time only two days
> before the election. There was never an effort made to gather
> citizen input or discuss the proposals in the open; they came
> as a complete surprise.

I also had the impression that many patricians protested because they
were left out of the votation. Am I right?

> His former colleague, Tribune Labienus, has since enacted a law
> that prevents that sort of abuse.

Which law is that, if I may ask?

> > Here all new citizens join the 5th class.
>
> New citizens have been placed in the third through fifth classes. In
> the future, most will probably start in the fifth class, but can
> climb
> out of it quickly - century reallocation will now be simple and
> automated, and can happen as often as necessary - such as a few
> days before the start of each and every election.

I do think that the automatic system you are implementing is much
needed. Thank you for the effort, Octavi.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:47:31 -0500

Salvete

> I have a few questions about the Comitia Centuriata. I have the
> impression that the censores are free to assign a number of centuries
> to each class as they see fit. Is this impression correct?

Yes. The first Lex Iunia Centuriata gave this power to the censores. C
Marius and I suggested it when we were rogatores as a fix to prevent
some irregularities in the Comitia Centuriata's first election from
being repeated. In retrospect, it was a mistake.

As an aside, those irregularities did not make any difference in the
outcome of that vote. We checked.

>>>It would in fact be better to have a wealth based century
>>>
>>I suspect the outcry against that would be tremendous if we tried
>>it...
>
> I agree with you, M. Octavi. There would be a huge outcry. And, in my
> humble opinion, righteously so.

I don't think M' Villius was actually suggesting such a policy.

> I also had the impression that many patricians protested because they
> were left out of the votation. Am I right?

Yes, that was an issue at the time.

>>His former colleague, Tribune Labienus, has since enacted a law
>>that prevents that sort of abuse.
>
> Which law is that, if I may ask?

Lex Labiena de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis Tributorum, which Consul Vedius
and I crafted together as part of a consistent system for each of the
trina comitia. The required time for public review of a potential lex
was only one issue that the plebiscitum addressed.

> I do think that the automatic system you are implementing is much
> needed. Thank you for the effort, Octavi.

Agreed, absolutely! Multas gratias Marce Octavi.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
"The Earth is degenerating today. Bribery and corruption abound.
Children no longer obey their parents, every man wants to write a book,
and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching."
- Assyrian Tablet, c.2800 BC


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:17:24 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete omnes; et salve, tribune Fortunate.

Thank you for answering my questions, tribune. Comments follow.

--- Fortunatus <labienus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete
>
> > I have a few questions about the Comitia Centuriata. I have the
> > impression that the censores are free to assign a number of
> centuries
> > to each class as they see fit. Is this impression correct?
>
>
> Yes. The first Lex Iunia Centuriata gave this power to the censores.
> C
> Marius and I suggested it when we were rogatores as a fix to prevent
> some irregularities in the Comitia Centuriata's first election from
> being repeated. In retrospect, it was a mistake.

Just for curiosity's sake. Was there opposition to that proposal when
it was first presented to the Comitia?

> As an aside, those irregularities did not make any difference in the
> outcome of that vote. We checked.

Which irregularities, if I may ask?

> >>>It would in fact be better to have a wealth based century
> >>>
> >>I suspect the outcry against that would be tremendous if we tried
> >>it...
> >
> > I agree with you, M. Octavi. There would be a huge outcry. And, in
> my
> > humble opinion, righteously so.
>
>
> I don't think M' Villius was actually suggesting such a policy.

Neither did I. I just expressed my opinions; I was not commenting
Villius' message :-).

> > I also had the impression that many patricians protested because
> they
> > were left out of the votation. Am I right?
>
>
> Yes, that was an issue at the time.

Then, why has Octavius Germanicus stated, on his previous message, that
the issue was about the lack of time to discuss the proposals?

> >>His former colleague, Tribune Labienus, has since enacted a law
> >>that prevents that sort of abuse.
> >
> > Which law is that, if I may ask?
>
>
> Lex Labiena de Ratione Comitiorum Plebis Tributorum, which Consul
> Vedius
> and I crafted together as part of a consistent system for each of the
> trina comitia. The required time for public review of a potential
> lex
> was only one issue that the plebiscitum addressed.

Thank you, Tribune. You have been very helpful.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Triumvir Academiae Novae Romae in Thule
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Novae Romae in Thule.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Wed, 29 Aug 2001 01:12:28 +0200

Salvete Omnes!

Limitanus has given us a good analysis of the traditional
Roman system of republican government and ours.

(Below the second quotee is Octavius and the third, Astur.
I am "MAF".)

Ancient Rome used to live under a mixed system:
Aritocratic through the senate (not the centuries)
Monarchic through the imperium conceded to the magistrates
Democratic "geometric" (cf Thales) through the centuries
(sometimes called oligarchic when the geometric coefficient
was very high)
Democratic "arithmetic" (athenian) through the CP.

Modern democracy (even in the USA) is mixed system between
ancient arithmetic democracy and monarchy (elected
magistrates with large powers).

MAF: I might disagree a little here, because there are also
elected representatives of various kinds sitting in
assemblies, and they do not really fit into classical
Graeco-Roman political theory very well.

NovaRoma comes close to pure oligarchy because of the
choosen century sistem:

--- Mar--------O--------ius Germani--------<hu----------------> wrote:
> Salve Mani Vili,
>
> > Elected Magistrates and Former Magistrates are nearly
>>alone in theircenturies and therefore have more political
>>power in order to reelect themselves.
>
>That's a temporary effect, resulting from the long time
>between reallocations. If the number of centuries per
>class remains constant when centuries are reallocated
>again, there won't be any centuries -
> even in the first class - with less than three people.

MAF: I must admit that such small centuries as three
persons do not really seem to be so different from the
original statement of Limitanus: "*nearly* alone in their
centuries", and the point about their having great power to
reelect themselves remains valid, does it not.

I have a few questions about the Comitia Centuriata. I have
the impression that the censores are free to assign a
number of centuries to each class as they see fit. Is this
impression correct?

Anyway, it is true that an abnormal (and antihistorical)
level of reelection does occur.

MAF: Yes, in Cicero's time (for example) one could not hold
the same office until ten years had passed. And two years
had to pass between holding of offices from Curule Aedile
upwards - and from a minumum age of 30 for the Quaestorship
(earlier it had been 28) to the minimum age for the
consulship of 43 there were obviously many years in which
normally a political man would not be holding elective
office, but letting someone else hold it so that power
would be distributed in time and among a relatively larger
group of leaders. As Astur observes, we have a
non-histoical and anomalous situation because we allow such
a small group to be elected or "elect themselves" in effect
(to some extent) again and again. Legislation on this was
discussed for Nova Roma on Censor Sulla's Law List, but no
action was ever taken. Hopefully it will be, as this is
something that both Roman traditionalists amd reformers can
supposedly agree upon.

> > It would in fact be better to have a wealth based
century
> > system, at least this way you could gain political
>>power without having it in the first place.
>
> I suspect the outcry against that would be tremendous if
we tried
> it...

I agree with you, M. Octavi. There would be a huge outcry.
And, in my humble opinion, righteously so.

MAF: And I agree with both Octavius and Astur - but
Limitanus was expressing his frustration with the present
state of affairs, not making a literalistic proposal -
obviously.

> > The democratic part is near to inexistent, when the
>>tribunes tried to propose laws they were called
>>"anti-democratic".
>
> The main reason for the protest against tribune Piscinus'
>proposals was because they were announced for the first
>time only two days before the election. There was never
>an effort made to gather citizen input or discuss the
>proposals in the open; they came as a complete surprise.

I also had the impression that many patricians protested
because they were left out of the votation. Am I right?

MAF: Yes, Astur, you are correct. We have that other
unhistorical problem of having a gigantic patrician
population, proportionally speaking. Some of them are no
more powerful than plebeians, so it seems unfair that they
are not protected with a vote in the plebeian assembly. We
really should do something about this. In the meantime,
though, I agree with Piscinus that a tribune to assert
plebeian rights and identity must feel free to use the
plebeian assembly for some things, and there is nothing to
keep that from being things that would benefit everyone by
moving ahead our mixed Roman democracy and asserting human
and civil rights for all. The Senate, a *much* smaller and
even less representative body, regularly makes decisions
that affect everyone, although its members never have to
face reelection to that council. There is no reason why the
plebeians should not have the same right to balance things
out. However, it is not the ideal situation. Drusus'
initiative to let the tribunes call the more representative
Comitia Populi Tributa has its merits, but there again, it
is not fair that patricians should vote for what
historically was an occasion for the plebeians to vote for
their prerogatives and concerns as distinct from those of
the patricians.

> His former colleague, Tribune Labienus, has since enacted
>a law that prevents that sort of abuse.

Which law is that, if I may ask?

> > Here all new citizens join the 5th class.
>
> New citizens have been placed in the third through fifth
>classes. In the future, most will probably start in the
>fifth class, but can climb
>out of it quickly - century reallocation will now be
>simple and automated, and can happen as often as necessary
>- such as a few
> days before the start of each and every election.

I do think that the automatic system you are implementing
is much needed. Thank you for the effort, Octavi.

MAF: I join with Astur in praising Octavius for this very
welcome innovation.

>>We clearly have an oligarchic micro-nation, much more
>>oligarchic that Rome was.

>>Manius Villius Limitanus

MAF: Yes, we do. I hope it is a stage that we shall
outgrow. Perhaps Sulla was trying to urge us to say
"aristocratic" rather than "oligarchic"? To my democratic
ears that sounds about the same, but if enough members of
the oligarchy would prefer to be called "aristocrats" maybe
we should agree, since I am not interested in insulting
people with words, but in identifying a socio-political
problem that we have. Solving that matter does not involve
aristocratic heads rolling from the guillotine, but just an
adaptation of traditional Roman laws to open up major
positions every year on a wider scale to people who have
never held them before - as was the case in Roma Antiqua.

Valete!


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] "Mock Trial" Iudices needed.
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:42:19 EDT

In a message dated 8/28/01 9:35:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
marcusafricanus@-------- writes:

> I will be willing to serve.
>
> marcusafricanus@--------
> M. Scipio Africanus
>

Salve M. Scipio Africane
You are the XI juror. Thank you for your interest.
Vale
Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oligarchy/Mixed System/Centuries
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Wed, 29 Aug 2001 01:12:28 +0200