Forum Romanum


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Report on the Ist Microcon
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:44:53 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michel Loos [mailto:loos@--------]
> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 6:56 AM
>
> yesterday, Saturday, 27th October, took place in S=E3o Paulo the fist
> MicroCon: Convention of Micronations. On the indication of Propraetor M.
> Arminius Maior, I participated as representant of NovaRoma.

I am pleased to hear about such a conference being held; too bad this is the
first I have heard about it. Perhaps if you and M. Arminius had not been so
tight-lipped about it, you might have actually been in attendence with some
sort of official imprimatur (or at the very least, some advice from those of
us with a bit more experience with the micronational scene). Still, I'm
happy that Nova Roma was represented.

> I must have been quite convincing since several
> micronationalist asked thereafter how to join NR, some were cooled down
> by the necessity of english, many were interrested by the possibility of
> learning latin, we will see if some really join.

While I am heartened about hearing about the warm reception Nova Roma got, I
am a bit puzzled about your statement regarding "the necessity of English".
I do hope you did not misrepresent any official policy; specifically, I hope
you made it clear that posts in all languages are welcome here on this email
list as well as they are accompanied by an English translation, if only to
make such posts intelligible to the vast majority of our Citizens.

> I must say that was quite favourably impressed by the speech of the
> representant of the "Imperium of Atlantis", perhaps NR could try to
> establish some sort of relation with them.

Unfortunately, such a relation has already been sought to no avail. Since we
refer to ourselves as a "micronation", and they specifically eschew
relations with micronations, they will not afford us any sort of official
recognition. Such is one reason I suggested to the Senate that we ourselves
begin to refer to ourselves as a "sovereignty project" rather than
micronation, but the idea was quickly rejected...

> The following speeches and discussions on "Micronationalism",
> "Micronational economy", "Culture and Education" were in the hands of
> the representants of the lusfone micro-micronations and frankly are not
> worthwhile to report here, seeming more either the expression of
> over-develloped egos or of children games.

Dare I ask if the "Empire of Reunion" might have been one of the presenters
to which you refer? :-)

> I did not participate in the discussion on "Diplomacy" were the
> foundations of the desired federation should have been layed since I was
> not invested of any diplomatical power for this reunion.

As I said above, had anyone else known about it, you might very well have.
Such is the value of communication...

> From my private discussions with the representant of Atlantium, I
> discovered another possibility of recognition for NR. I tseems that
> Atlantium managed to have an observer at the UNPO: "Unrepresented
> Nations and Peoples Organisation", which is a recognition of
> macronational presence. In my opinion this could be an interresting move
> also for NovaRoma. check: http://www.unpo.org

Definitely something to look into. Let me look into the prospects.

Thanks very much for your report; if you have any more detail you could
share, I would love to see it.

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Aedilician Meeting in Venedia
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:47:57 -0500

Salve;

I am very pleased that this meeting in Venedia has gone off so well! I am
particularly pleased that the prospects of the organization of the province,
once the Senate sees fit to appoint a governor, were discussed; I am all in
favor of more local control. (This whole "grass-roots democracy" thing might
need a bit more explanation, however... *grin*) Are the five active cives in
the province local to one another to the point of making regular meetings a
practical possibility?

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 10:18 AM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] Aedilician Meeting in Venedia
>
>
>
>
>
> M. Apollonius Formosanus Aedilis Plebeius omnibus
> Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> A good many weeks ago Consul Vedius issued a Friendly
> Challenge to all aediles to sponsor local face-to-face
> meetings sometime during our term of office. I am pleased
> to announce that I with my staff have done so, and that on
> Saturday, October 27 provincial cives from four cities and
> towns of the Provincia Venedia collected in Lessna
> Polonorum ("Leszno" in Polish) under my aedilician auspices
> for the first Conventus Provincialis.
>
> I must give special thanks to my scriba Petrus Domitianus
> Artorinus Longinus for doing the bulk of the organising
> work. He and my other scriba Maia Apollonia Pica were both
> present, making this also a meeting of my complete
> aedilician staff. For some of us this was the first
> face-to-face meeting with another Nova Roman.
>
> We shared a pleasant repast together in a hostelry dating
> back to the early XIVth Century and discussed various
> matters of importance to the Provincia. Among these were
> the official holiday of the Provincia - the first dies
> fastus after our provincial recognition by the Senate was
> granted -, our provincial deities and religious provisions,
> the natural divisions of the Provincia into regiones in
> terms of the Roman population and geography, and the date
> of the next meeting, tentatively scheduled for early March.
>
> Some of these affairs will be put up for a poll among the
> provincial citizens to encourage their participation and a
> sense of grass-roots democracy and local control, matters
> important to the whole provincial population. Subsequently
> these policy recommendations will be laid before the
> governor for officialisation, when the Senate has appointed
> one.
>
> Out of a de facto population of about fourteen provincial
> cives, we felt that a turnout of five was creditable. The
> next meeting will presumably be in Varsovia (Warsaw) and
> rather longer and more elaborate.
>
> All present were very pleased with the event, and we hope
> to have photographs up on our list site or web site soon -
> a separate announcement will be issued by me or Scriba
> Domitianus when they are ready.
>
> Valete!
>
>
> _________________________________________________
> Marcus Apollonius Formosanus
> Psterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae
> Aedilis Plebeius, Amicus Dignitatis
> Magister Scholae Latinae
> ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus
> Minervium Virtuale: http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/Minervium.htm
> Gens Apollonia: http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/
> The Gens Apollonia is accepting new members.
> ____________________________________________________
> All that is needed for the forces of evil to triumph in the world is for
> enough good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
> ___________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>


Subject:	[novaroma] R: Provincia Illyricum
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:07:43 +0100

Salvete,
the official Nova Roman map of European Provinciae shows the Slovenia and
Croatia are in the Provincia Pannonia (I cry ...). I don't know if a
division is possible with a little number of cives in this lands.
So I thing like Senate about the creation of a Provincia with people from
Crotia, Bosnia, Iugoslavia and Albania, too grudge! It's impossible create
the "big" Provincia Balcanica with Romania, Bulgaria and Macedonia too,
there are different languages, different cultures and too few cives.
In my opinion you can make a community in this lands growing the number of
active cives and when you'll right you can ask the creation of the
Provincia.

Valete
Franciscus Apulus Caesar
-------------------------------------------
Provincia Italia
Paterfamilias Gens Apula
www.provinciaitalia.f2s.com/apula
----------------------------------------
Alme Sol ... Possis Nihil Urbe Roma Visere Maius


Subject:	[novaroma] Museum Tour
From:	AntoniaCorneliaOctavia <europamoon7@-------->
Date:	Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:06:35 -0800 (PST)

Avete Omnes,

Just wanted to let you all know about the tour
yesterday at the Bowers Museum in Santa Ana,
California. There were seven of us on the tour (two
guests didn't make it) which started at 11:00 a.m.
The guests included our illustrious Censor Lucius
Cornelius Sulla Felix, Questor Secunda Cornelia
Valeria and several other Nova Roman cives. There
were two exhibits included in the tour: The Etruscans
and The Holy Land. Both exhibits were exceptional and
very interesting. The Holy Land exhibit included
actual fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls beautifully
preserved. There were numerous artifacts and
sculptures available for viewing and an amazing
display of 60 lithographs by David Roberts, R. A.
which were produced during his tour of the Holy Land
in the 1800's. Our tour guide for the Holy Land
exhibit was both informative and well spoken and was
very interested in hearing about our Roman group. I
was more than happy to answer any questions that she
had. The Etruscan exhibit was a self-guided tour and
gave us all a chance to discuss and chatter amongst
ourselves. After both tours which took approximately
two and a half hours, we spent some time in the gift
shop and then proceeded to the courtyard for lunch.
The restaurant offered an elegant eclectic menu which
accented the wonderful company and delightful
conversation. A good time was had by all.

I will be hosting another gathering at my home on
Sunday, December 9 at 1:00 p.m. I will be posting
further details soon. Please feel free to email me
with any questions or comments.

Bene Valete,

Antonia Cornelia Octavia
Scriba ad Proconsul de California

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com


Subject:	[novaroma] Census Draft, Elections, Civil Law Draft Intro
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:36:51 -0000

Salvete Omnes:

As I have been working more than I care, and thus only just able to
read the mainlist posts through the past week or so, I am only
commenting now, as time has graciously allowed:

Regarding the proposed Census Draft Edictum/Lex:

A few civites seemed to justifiably throw their hands in the air
regarding the niggardly turnout of the past election in response to
the summoning of the Comitia Centuria by our Senior Consul; this
turnout, may or may not have been as a result of a lex previously
adopted incidicating a mandatory electorial representation of I
believe (should have looked) 90 Centuries, votewise.

It well could have been the timing: the war, the emotions, people
involved in the tragedies of Sept. 11, and the like, but let us assume
it is the lex, and that there is a foreseeable problem in the future
based on the wording of this lex.

This lex, as my honourable Propraetoral colleague, L. Sicinius Drusus
has stated, is based on the assumption that we have more active
citizens than we care to admit........I believe this is to be true.

In response and as possible resolution to the above, the Senior
Censor, L.Cornelius Sulla furnished the res publica with a draft
suggesting a Census, a concept which has been entertained in the past,
although not formally by editum or lege.

This has been met with a variety of hairsplitting, as well as viable
comments, and I truly believe that we need to keep a tally on who is
active and who is not, based on some of the criteria we have talked
about here, ie taxes, activity.......if we are going to base laws on
the population numbers. My feeling is that we will have to be
accurate about our "real population" as opposed to empty names, if we
want lexes which truly reflect the desires and needs or our people.

My thanks to the Censor for his timeliness in furnishing a possible
solution; I think we need this, but with due respect, Pater Sulla, it
will not solve the problem for the forthcoming election of
Magistrates......a very important election:

Honoured magistrates, which brings me to my point (Oh, yes, .......my
point :)).........we should not be spending time digressing on the
fine lines of a lex which will likely not materialize until next year;
what we NEED (no yelling) is to come to a firm solution on how we will
handle a poor voter turnout for an election of magistrates.

As a Propraetrix speaking for her constituents, and as an active
(trying) member of the res publica, how are we going to handle a poor
century turnout? I do not want to hear.......sorry, civie of Canada
Orientalis, not enough Centuries turned out to vote (even though you
got a popular vote and people have openly stated they love you), so
you are not "elected"............We do not have our priorities in
order, IMHO..........We have to get a plan together, not just casually
mention it, and inadvertently waste time nickpicking a draft which was
handed in as a bona fide solution to future problems.

What are we going to do for the next election, if we do not have the
required number of centuries voting???.....we are not dealing with
lexes here, which can be thrown back into the suggestion box and
offered up for vote again........we are talking about civites who take
time, effort, and $$$ to run for office (costs $$$$$$ to set up a
website, a good one)........THIS, is our priority........NOT Census
drafts right now, and NOT diplomatic relations......although these are
important.....just not a priority.

I have offered a couple of ideas, but I am not going to proclaim
myself an expert; bottom line: what is our plan for the next
election?

It is easy to lay blame for why we are in the situation? Consuls
fault? Nope. Censors' fault? Nope. Praetors
fault?...........Noooope. It is the fault of the populace who voted
for this lex, and didn't forsee the eventual ramifications.

Welcome to a res publica :)

A few magistrates, including the Senior Censor by putting a draft in
writing, offered a possible solution. Unfortunately, it's a long term
solution, and cannot possibly be implemented, IMHO until next year.

We need to address the next election, please.

******************************

Civil Law Comments/Draft

I have a few comments on the civil law comments offered approximately
8 days ago by the Praetors:

Sorry, honoured Praetors, but I am disappointed. All I saw in the
texts presented to the mainlist is that you would like to "go for the
throat", but only in "extreme cases" of course.

This is good.........

But what about the more obscure, misdemeanor type offences which are
to occur more often than your capital "banishment" type offenses?
There was nothing tabling what we should do in these situations. I am
not an expert in law, but I do no that people, numberwise, spit on the
sidewalk, more often than they commit grand theft or murder.An
analogy only.

What about persons impersonating others in the chatroom? Now the
security "looks" tight right now, but will it remain that way, and if
it is broken, how shall it be dealt with?

Defammation of Character by someone who posts to the mainlist about
another citizen, that is, one not moderated by the Curatrix
Sermonis......a civie who has been able to post for some time, yet
suddenly does a dirty a claims various amounts of nasties about
another person?

And, how much abuse is the Curatrix to be subjected to, privately,
before the Praetors step in and do something, that is assuming the
absence of imperium (why I won't do the job next year)???

Failure to conform to Magisterial/Senatorial obligations? If a
magistrate is grossly maladroit in his duties, what shall be done?
If a Senator hasn't voted 20 times in a row, is this ok? Or should
something be done?

Private threats of bodily harm or death? Hey, this can be addressed
macronationally, but I think it should be tabled under Nova Roma Civil
law too, no?

The PRIMARY thing I can see worth addressing that was PRESENT in the
digression of the Senior Praetor (assuming he is addressing both
Praetors) is that he is tossing the idea of the Collegium of the
Religio cursing or "banishing" someone's name in the name of the
Gods/Goddesses of Rome forever"........

hmmmmmmmmmmmm.........I dunno.................

I believe that if you send a note to the senate or to the ml or other
public place, "cursing" the Olympians/Pantheon of Rome, there is cause
to be dismissed from the community. You bet.

And we have, what I feel, if a rather justifiable precedent for this
tabled. It was awful, apparently. You don't have to "believe", but you
needn't "curse" either.

However...............you are never, IMHO, without a
prayer.......NOBODY, IMHO, has the right to curse you from the
divine...........that's not our job, is it? We can kick you out of
NR, but you always have a prayer. I don't think Nova Roma should paint
herself in such a bad light here.

Sounds very medieval Catholic to me.........the very thing I thought
many civites would rather "be without" in Nova Roma.

And if you were away from NovaRoma for two years and appealed to the
Senate/Censors and said............." I've thought about things, and I
am truly sorry"............what do we do then?

Sorry honoured Praetors, with the utmost of respect, yet concurrent
disappointment, if this is the best you can come up with in your
tenure of office, I am truly disappointed.

My comments to date, made in good faith, for better or for
worse........none the less, how I truly feel.

Bene vale,
Pompeia Cornelia
Propraetrix Canada Orientalis
Nova Roma


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Census Draft, Elections, Civil Law Draft Intro
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:22:10 EST

In a message dated 10/29/01 10:40:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
trog99@-------- writes:

> Sorry honoured Praetors, with the utmost of respect, yet concurrent
> disappointment, if this is the best you can come up with in your
> tenure of office, I am truly disappointed.
>
> My comments to date, made in good faith, for better or for
> worse........none the less, how I truly feel.
>
>

Actually it often amazes me, how people read between the lines of postings
and come away with concepts never intended by the writer.
While defamation of character would be an injuria offense, no one ever
suggested "death" to be the common punishment for that offense. The Iudex
assigning the punishment would likely levy a fine.
Banishment would be reserved for enemies or traitors of the state, as for
damning the guilty party, the Romans did do that, so perhaps the Catholics
adopted that from our spiritual ancestors.
I lean towards fines and community service since we cannot sell unpaying
citizens into slavery.
Of course if the accused feels that the sentence is to severe, he can appeal
the result to the Comitia. All Roman citizens have that right.
Sorry if I'm terse. We are filming the story of "Peter the first Pope" this
week for history channel, and as historical adviser, I have been overseeing
the costume construction of the Praetorian and City Guards.
More law discussion next week.
Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Census Draft, Elections, Civil Law Draft Intro
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:31:36 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, QFabiusMaxmi@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 10/29/01 10:40:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> trog99@-------- writes:
>
>
> > Sorry honoured Praetors, with the utmost of respect, yet
concurrent
> > disappointment, if this is the best you can come up with in your
> > tenure of office, I am truly disappointed.
> >
> > My comments to date, made in good faith, for better or for
> > worse........none the less, how I truly feel.
> >
> >
>
> Actually it often amazes me, how people read between the lines of
postings
> and come away with concepts never intended by the writer.
> While defamation of character would be an injuria offense, no one
ever
> suggested "death" to be the common punishment for that offense.

POMPEIA: I never suggested you said that sir; I am mearly saying that
it was never addressed by you at all. I was merely giving an anology,
which I clearly stated.

The
Iudex
> assigning the punishment would likely levy a fine.
> Banishment would be reserved for enemies or traitors of the state,
as for
> damning the guilty party, the Romans did do that, so perhaps the
Catholics
> adopted that from our spiritual ancestors.
> I lean towards fines and community service since we cannot sell
unpaying
> citizens into slavery.

Pompeia: How refreshing to hear.

> Of course if the accused feels that the sentence is to severe, he
can appeal
> the result to the Comitia. All Roman citizens have that right.
> Sorry if I'm terse. We are filming the story of "Peter the first
Pope" this
> week for history channel, and as historical adviser, I have been
overseeing
> the costume construction of the Praetorian and City Guards.
> More law discussion next week.

Pompeia: I wish you well on your film endeavors, but you have not
addressed the issues which I have brought forth, either with your
writings or mine, with any degree of accuracy or relevance. My
appraisal stands: you guys have done a poor job in furnishing Nova
Roma with a code of civil laws.....

Honoured Praetors, I do not "dream" these things up, I only formulate
opinions on what you have posted; as far as "reading between the
lines", based on my primary post, I do not feel I have done so.
Although, if one "wanted: to read between the lines, there is much
elacrity here; there is indeed a wide space between the few lines the
two of you have written in response to your promise of atleast a
"reasonable" start on a civil law package for Nova Roma.

If you were nurses in my charge,,ahh, never mind, I don't want to get
ugly

Po

Q. Fabius Maximus
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Census Draft, Elections, Civil Law Draft Intro
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:31:40 -0000


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Report on the Ist Microcon
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	30 Oct 2001 08:47:30 -0200

Salve,

On Tue, 2001-10-30 at 00:44, Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote:
> Salve;
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michel Loos [mailto:loos@--------]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 6:56 AM
> >
> > yesterday, Saturday, 27th October, took place in S=E3o Paulo the fist
> > MicroCon: Convention of Micronations. On the indication of Propraetor M.
> > Arminius Maior, I participated as representant of NovaRoma.
>
> I am pleased to hear about such a conference being held; too bad this is the
> first I have heard about it. Perhaps if you and M. Arminius had not been so
> tight-lipped about it, you might have actually been in attendence with some
> sort of official imprimatur (or at the very least, some advice from those of
> us with a bit more experience with the micronational scene). Still, I'm
> happy that Nova Roma was represented.
>

I diod not inform NovaRoma before because I was convinced it was a hoax,
I was ready to make a fool of myself going to the legislative for
nothing but not of NR.
How did we learn about that reunion: a 5 lines messages of a non member
of our provincial list indicating a home made web page on free hosting
server.
http://www.ndata.com.br/microcon/microcon/main.htm
It really did not seem serious, but since there is a fine park and
museum besides the legislative I intend to pass my morning there after
checking.

> > I must have been quite convincing since several
> > micronationalist asked thereafter how to join NR, some were cooled down
> > by the necessity of english, many were interrested by the possibility of
> > learning latin, we will see if some really join.
>
> While I am heartened about hearing about the warm reception Nova Roma got, I
> am a bit puzzled about your statement regarding "the necessity of English".
> I do hope you did not misrepresent any official policy; specifically, I hope
> you made it clear that posts in all languages are welcome here on this email
> list as well as they are accompanied by an English translation, if only to
> make such posts intelligible to the vast majority of our Citizens.
>

I didn t even mention that hopefully transitory rule (I hope it will not
be renewd by the next curator). I just said that of course in an
organization of that size most of the communication are in english in
order to be able to communicate worlwide. I have also be asked if our
main site is multilingual and answered that it was in english only and
being translated to latin. That was the point that induced the sentiment
of "necessity" of the english language.

> > I must say that was quite favourably impressed by the speech of the
> > representant of the "Imperium of Atlantis", perhaps NR could try to
> > establish some sort of relation with them.
>
> Unfortunately, such a relation has already been sought to no avail. Since we
> refer to ourselves as a "micronation", and they specifically eschew
> relations with micronations, they will not afford us any sort of official
> recognition. Such is one reason I suggested to the Senate that we ourselves
> begin to refer to ourselves as a "sovereignty project" rather than
> micronation, but the idea was quickly rejected...
>

If they see all micronation as most of the ones that were present I
understand their reaction. If Yuri their representant reports back, you
could try again, he was quite favourably interested by our work here.
Clearly they are interrested in real world presence/relations and not in
relations with children games.

> > The following speeches and discussions on "Micronationalism",
> > "Micronational economy", "Culture and Education" were in the hands of
> > the representants of the lusfone micro-micronations and frankly are not
> > worthwhile to report here, seeming more either the expression of
> > over-develloped egos or of children games.
>
> Dare I ask if the "Empire of Reunion" might have been one of the presenters
> to which you refer? :-)

Yes on economy. And Orange and the Califado and Atlas.

>
> > I did not participate in the discussion on "Diplomacy" were the
> > foundations of the desired federation should have been layed since I was
> > not invested of any diplomatical power for this reunion.
>
> As I said above, had anyone else known about it, you might very well have.
> Such is the value of communication...
>

See above for the reasons.

Valete,

Manius Villius Limitanus.

> > From my private discussions with the representant of Atlantium, I
> > discovered another possibility of recognition for NR. I tseems that
> > Atlantium managed to have an observer at the UNPO: "Unrepresented
> > Nations and Peoples Organisation", which is a recognition of
> > macronational presence. In my opinion this could be an interresting move
> > also for NovaRoma. check: http://www.unpo.org
>
> Definitely something to look into. Let me look into the prospects.
>
> Thanks very much for your report; if you have any more detail you could
> share, I would love to see it.
>
> Vale,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Report on the Ist Microcon
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:32:42 -0500

Salve;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michel Loos [mailto:loos@--------]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 5:48 AM
>
> I diod not inform NovaRoma before because I was convinced it was a hoax,
> I was ready to make a fool of myself going to the legislative for
> nothing but not of NR.

Fair enough; better safe than sorry, I suppose. Any idea if they'll be doing
this sort of thing again?

Vale,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul


Subject:	[novaroma] Help needed by a new citizen
From:	"rapax@--------" <rapax@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:13:37 +0200

Salvete...
I've a few questions but first allow me to introduce myself.I'm
another 'new,happy
and proud' citizen of NovaRoma.My main interests are Religio (for my
husband is a
Pagan.No disrespect meant with the term.) and Roman history as a devoted
student!
I'm 28 years old ,a graduate of the Faculty of Fine Arts,working as an
interior designer
in spite of being an Artist :)
Here are my questions...Were there 'extraordinary' women in the
history of Rome?In
politics the ones I know are mostly evil like Messalina and
Agrippina.Were there any
virtuous and famous ones who could represent the ideal model of Roman women?
There were women gladiators but were they Roman citizens?Or slaves
from the provincias?Besides fighting with dwarfs had they fought with men
in equal
terms? As you can see I'm looking for the traces of Roman women who achieved
extraordinary things in political,social and if I can find (I wish I can
but I guess the
Roman army was a kind of Boys' club :) ) in military areas.
Thanks in advance for your guidance.It is great to be here.
Valete
Minervina Sentia Hypatia


Subject:	[novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 10:00:46 -0500

Salvete;

I will be calling the Comitia Centuriata to order quite soon to present a
bill to change the absolute majority requirement to a majority of those
centuries which cast votes. This should solve the problem that has emerged
with low voter turnout, while retaining the ancient system of requiring a
true majority. Here's the text of the proposed amendment:

-----

LEX VEDIA DE RATIONE COMITIORUM CENTURIATORUM

I. The Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuiatorum of August 2754 is hereby
amended to read as follows:

II. In Paragraph V.B. and its sub-paragraphs, the phrase "97 of the 193
centuries" shall be replaced with the phrase "a majority (50% +1) of those
centuries which cast valid votes" wherever it occurs.

-----

Short and sweet, it will fix the problem and yet retain historicity. Namely,
once we _do_ have all 193 centuries voting, the historical requirement for
an absolute majority will still be in effect.

Once I hear back from our rogatores regarding their availability, I will be
calling the Comitia to vote. This must be completed by the start of the
year-end elections, of course. I trust that everyone will make an extra
special effort to vote, as we will be operating under the current (firm 97
centuries in favor) rules.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Census Draft, Elections, Civil Law Draft Intro
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:39:49 EST

In a message dated 10/30/01 1:33:15 AM Pacific Standard Time,
trog99@-------- writes:

> you guys have done a poor job in furnishing Nova
> Roma with a code of civil laws.....
>

Salvete.
Since we haven't yet, don't you think your criticism is at best, premature?
You start with framework. We haven't finished the frame work yet.
As for the punishment portion, I wanted to enlighten NR citizens with the
proposed punishments to see how they would react. Only you, Propraetor
Cornelia
had anything negative to say about it. Since this was not a law code, but a
list of punishments, for the yet to be published code, your comments were not
helpful.

Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Help needed by a new citizen
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:46:22 EST

In a message dated 10/30/01 7:00:37 AM Pacific Standard Time,
rapax@-------- writes:

> As you can see I'm looking for the traces of Roman women who achieved
> extraordinary things in political,social

Livia, wife of Augustus, was considered by most Roman historians to be the
one of the greatest Roman women. Even if she was the "evil power behind the
throne" as Seut. asserts she still accomplished a great deal with the aid of
her famous husband.

Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Help needed by a new citizen
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:59:58 -0500

Salve,

I am curious. You have been a member of the Main List since March of 2001
and used to post, at one point quite frequently, under a different name
here. Have you just *now* received citizenship after all this time? Just
curious, as the change of name and introduction as being "new" seems a bit
confusing.

Vale,
Priscilla Vedia Serena

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rapax@-------- [mailto:rapax@--------]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 10:14 AM
> To: novaroma
> Subject: [novaroma] Help needed by a new citizen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Salvete...
> I've a few questions but first allow me to introduce myself.I'm
> another 'new,happy
> and proud' citizen of NovaRoma.My main interests are Religio (for my
> husband is a
> Pagan.No disrespect meant with the term.) and Roman history as
> a devoted
> student!
> I'm 28 years old ,a graduate of the Faculty of Fine Arts,working as an
> interior designer
> in spite of being an Artist :)
> Here are my questions...Were there 'extraordinary' women in the
> history of Rome?In
> politics the ones I know are mostly evil like Messalina and
> Agrippina.Were there any
> virtuous and famous ones who could represent the ideal model of
> Roman women?
> There were women gladiators but were they Roman citizens?Or slaves
> from the provincias?Besides fighting with dwarfs had they
> fought with men
> in equal
> terms? As you can see I'm looking for the traces of Roman women
> who achieved
> extraordinary things in political,social and if I can find (I
> wish I can
> but I guess the
> Roman army was a kind of Boys' club :) ) in military areas.
> Thanks in advance for your guidance.It is great to be here.
> Valete
> Minervina Sentia Hypatia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	Michael Loughlin <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 10:20:06 -0800 (PST)

Ave,
I must voice an opinion on this lex regardless of
the fact that it will not change anything. I
understand that the intention to fix the previous lex
while at the same time maintaining the true majority
aspect of the elections. But I must say that a 50%+1
does not truly show a true majority. When looking at
it shows that a piece of legislature being voted upon
just barely passed. Not that it is really going to
matter due to the opposotion to such an amendment but
I will reiterate myself anyways. I still suggest a
2/3 majority which will show that a true majority of
the election body was in favor of a piece of
legislation. But no matter what those in power must
do what is necessary to make the system work.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com


Subject:	[novaroma] New yahoogroup: NR Humanitas
From:	"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 22:07:56 +0100

Ave!

I have just created a new newsgroup for people interested in 'Humanities': Philosophy, Historiography, Geography, Literature pur sang

You can check out on: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NRHumanitas
or join this group by sending an email to: NRHumanitas-subscribe@--------

Hope to see some of you there!

Below is a short essay situating the group.

1. Philosophy / De rerum Natura etc.
- Roman philosophy:
* Epicurians: Lucretius, Horatius
* Stoa: Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus
* Eclectics: Cicero
* Sceptics: Sextus Empiricus
- Greek antecedents, inspirators and counterparts
* Stoa: Zeno, Chrysippus, Posidonius
* Sceptics: Pyrrho
* Epicurians: Epicurus of course
* Eclectics: Philo Judaeus
* Neoplatonics: Plotinus

2. Historiography (about Rome)
* In Latin: Sallustius, Caesar, Livius, Tacitus, Philo Judaeus, etc.
* In Greek: Diodorus Siculus, Dio Cassius, Polybius, etc.

3. Geography: Strabo, Diodorus Siculus

4.Literature 'pur sang':
* Poetry
* Prose
* Rhetorics
* Letters
* etc.

Of course, this list thus not want to be exaustive, and it is true that I myself know more about Historiography and Philosopha than e.g. rhetorics. But I'm sure lots of cives will be able to help me creating a new forum for this type of discussion, exchange of webbased sources, book reviews, etc.!

Vale optime!
Caius Puteus Germanicus

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


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	"Caius Puteus Germanicus" <puteus@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 22:18:39 +0100

Ave !

I just hope this lex will not block the proposal of Censor Sulla to reform the leges about a census. Regardless of that, I agree with the proposal. It is unrealistic to always strive to a 2/3-majority. A similar system would make our politics very bureaucratic and would deprive us of action on a short time basis. Think of a lex rejected because of only 65% in favour. Proposal to be reviewed, reposted, comitia recalled, votes recounted etc. This won't be needed if it is simply clear that only 49% are in favour, that would mean that 51% is against...

Last remark: if we would give 1/3 + 1 of the centuriae more power than 2/3 - 1, what kind of a system is that? I know not everything has to be 'democratic' in the modern sense of the word to be good*, but this is way over the edge!

*Historically Rome had something ot three systems as Polybius said: monarchy (in the consular powers), aristocracy (in the power of the senate), and democracy (the power of the comitiae). But antique democracy differs from modern one in that respect that not every vote counted as much (urban versus rural centuries) but there was a direct relation to civil duties (military service, tax paying).

Valete optime!
C. Puteus Germanicus

----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Loughlin
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon

Ave,
I must voice an opinion on this lex regardless of
the fact that it will not change anything. I
understand that the intention to fix the previous lex
while at the same time maintaining the true majority
aspect of the elections. But I must say that a 50%+1
does not truly show a true majority. When looking at
it shows that a piece of legislature being voted upon
just barely passed. Not that it is really going to
matter due to the opposotion to such an amendment but
I will reiterate myself anyways. I still suggest a
2/3 majority which will show that a true majority of
the election body was in favor of a piece of
legislation. But no matter what those in power must
do what is necessary to make the system work.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com


Subject:	[novaroma] ATTN. argent. Lat./Sp./Eng.
From:	danielovi@--------
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 23:28:32 -0000

Salvete omnes.
Consilium nostrum a.d. III Non. Nov. (dies tertium mensis Novembris)
habebimus in eodem loco et eadem hora. Spero ut multos adsimus.
Bene valete
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propr�tor provincialis Argentin�

Salvete omnes.
Les recuerdo que el pr�ximo s�bado tendremos nuestra pr�xima reuni�n
en el lugar de siempre y a la misma hora. Espero que seamos muchos.
Bene valete
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propr�tor provincialis Argentin�

Salvete omnes.
We shall have our next meeting next Saturday at the same place and
time as usual. I hope many people will be present.
Bene valete
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propr�tor provincialis Argentin�


Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The Comitia Centuriata will be called soon
From:	Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:49:31 -0800 (PST)

Salvete Quirites; et salve, Consul.

--- Flavius Vedius Germanicus <germanicus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> I will be calling the Comitia Centuriata to order quite soon to
> present a
> bill to change the absolute majority requirement to a majority of
> those
> centuries which cast votes. This should solve the problem that has
> emerged
> with low voter turnout, while retaining the ancient system of
> requiring a
> true majority. Here's the text of the proposed amendment:
>
> -----
>
> LEX VEDIA DE RATIONE COMITIORUM CENTURIATORUM
>
> I. The Lex Vedia de Ratione Comitiorum Centuiatorum of August 2754 is
> hereby
> amended to read as follows:
>
> II. In Paragraph V.B. and its sub-paragraphs, the phrase "97 of the
> 193
> centuries" shall be replaced with the phrase "a majority (50% +1) of
> those
> centuries which cast valid votes" wherever it occurs.
>
> -----
>
> Short and sweet, it will fix the problem and yet retain historicity.
> Namely,
> once we _do_ have all 193 centuries voting, the historical
> requirement for
> an absolute majority will still be in effect.
>
> Once I hear back from our rogatores regarding their availability, I
> will be
> calling the Comitia to vote. This must be completed by the start of
> the
> year-end elections, of course. I trust that everyone will make an
> extra
> special effort to vote, as we will be operating under the current
> (firm 97
> centuries in favor) rules.
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Consul

A swift and simple, albeit somehow provisional, solution. I will vote
in favour (should anyone be interested in my opinion ;-) ).
Have you considered proposing the laws that did not pass in the last
votation again?

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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com