Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Common Law in NR?
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:20:27 -0800 (PST)

Salvete,

I Think this is a good time to bring up just how
important precedents were to the Romans. Only a small
part of the traditions that made up the Mos Maiorum
were ever codified into Roman law, but that didn't
mean that the Romans didn't feel that they were bound
by these traditions, which were a set of Precedents
that our ancestors established, and which were
considered the proper, the Roman way of doing things.

The Romans were allways reluctant to elect a Novus
Homo, a man who's ancestors never held high office, it
was unprecedented for a member of that family to hold
office.

When a Praetor took office he would start with an
Edict that established how he would handle cases. It
was allmost always that he would follow the rules
established by an earlier Praetor, he was following
Precedents.

Romans were ruled by tradition in everything from what
name to give a newborn son to how to conduct your self
in office. The Cursus Honorium was a tradition, a
series of Precedents before Sulla the dictator enacted
it into law late in the Republic, but that didn't stop
most Romans from following it as rigidly as any lex in
Satrun's temple.

The Roman frame of mind respected Precedents, and
Romans would look down on any magistrate that failed
to follow the Precedents that were established by his
precedecessors. He might have the power to legally
ignore a precedent, but if he did so without a very
good reason, then his dignitas would suffer.

Innovation in government was something that Greeks
might play with, but it was NOT Roman.

Valete,
L. Sicinius Drusus

--- Martins-Esteves <esteves@--------> wrote:
> Salvete
>
> (q. fabius)
> Salvete
> <<I was gone during the start this debate, and since
> have heard a mishmash of
> law quotes including Gaius who is a Principate
> writer and not from the
> republic to get points across. >>
>
> I don't understand English well enough to estimate
> your intentions by using the word "mishmash". I
> don't know if there is something like "shut up cause
> I know what I am talking about" behind your words.
> But I'd rather believe that your intentions were the
> best and that you respected your interlocutors. I
> hope you understand you are not the only one here
> who knows Roman Law.
>
> (q. fabius)
> <<What I said, was neither Flavius or I would let
> Apollonius Draco waive his 9
> day waiting period, if we were asked. Why? Because
> it would set a precedent.>>
>
>
> No. What you said was, in verbis,
> <<May he find it to please his soul. He cannot
> waive his 9 days privilege, however. We have no
> precedent for that. >>
> As if you needed a precedent in order to accept or
> to reject something asked by a civis.
>
>
>
> <<To say that Precedent was not involved in the
> early Roman Republic is to not
> understand Roman Law. The Table of Twelve was set
> up by the commission of 10
> (decemvirs) based on tribal precedents, traditions
> and varies city state
> laws. The idea of a code was Greek, but execution
> was Roman. Since Romans
> were such traditionalists, they adopted and codified
> these traditions and
> precedents into Law. However the table had mostly
> laws to do with the Cult
> of Farmers, since Rome was an agricultural
> community.>>
>
> Perhaps you haven't read all the messages carefully
> enough. What you wrote here had already been said
> mutatis mutandis. We know that Precedents were very
> important in the early Republic, and perhaps the
> only fons legis under the Reges.
>
>
> <<Such laws do not help NR today, but it is a
> starting point. I think it would
> be unwise to ignore precedent and tradition. Our
> early spiritual ancestors
> did not. It would be a vain magistrate who would do
> so. >>
>
> That is of course the way you, a traditionalist,
> feel about it. And there is nothing wrong about
> feelings... But you couldn't say that somebody
> cannot do this or that because there is no
> precedent. Obviously you can judge one's request
> using the precedents, but these are merely
> adjuvants, that help you to interpret and to apply
> the Law.
>
> Respectfully
>
> Valete
>
> Atticus
>
>
>
> <<English common law uses precedent but in a
> different way. These were based
> on tribal customs, and eventually codified into a
> rigid system, with no
> leeway of decision.
> Valete
> Q. Fabius Maximus >>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] Site addition
From:	Matt Haase <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:11:58 -0600 (CST)

Salvete,

Information about Sodalitates (citizen associations) is now available:

http://www.novaroma.org/sodalitates/

Also, the main page has been reformatted to better categorize
the major content areas of the site.

Valete, Octavius.

--
Matt Haase (haase@--------)
http://www.konoko.net/~haase/
TALIBAN DELENDA EST

Subject:	[novaroma] archives
From:	"Martins-Esteves" <esteves@-------->
Date:	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 17:17:42 -0200

Salvete

Please help: how can I have access to the archives of the Main List?

Thanks.

Valete

Atticus



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] an undemocratic Republic
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	29 Dec 2001 02:25:06 -0200

On Fri, 2001-12-28 at 21:38, QFabiusMaxmi@-------- wrote:
> In a message dated 12/28/01 2:50:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> puteus@-------- writes:
>
>
> > It seems there are many more
> > democratic Rome-related organizations out there, and NR is the incorrigible
> >
>
> Salvete.
> Our foes make this claim, since our 1st class centuries are top heavy with
> the few members that are service vets, who with our voting system, have a
> better chance to help shape Roman policy. This no accident. Unlike old Rome
> there is no wealth qualification for the first class. It is based on service
> to Rome.
> In fact had if we had an equivalent wealth qualification for the first class,
> as old Rome, I and Marcus Octavious would likely be the only two Nova Romans
> to be allowed in.
> You gain power through service to Rome, citizens. The more you do for her,
> the more she rewards you. For three years only a handful have been doing
> service, and the power of the vote has become concentrated, giving rise to
> the Oligarchic claims of our detractors. This is slowly changing, as more
> citizens become involved in things Roman. So in several years at our present
> growth, this imagined Oligarchy voting power will cease to exist, and if
> there was any danger at all, it will be past.

Salve,

yes NR is rather faithfull to old Roma.
And this is a form of democracy: geometric democracy (Cf Thales).
There is absolutely no problem with this.

I have the feeling that our number of centuries is to large when
compared to our population.
Roma, while a small town of the Latium, probably with a population
comparable to ours in its beginnings did not start with the full 193
centuries. I think we should have at least 3 citizens/century (in the
first class, more in the others, thats fine for me). It would be fine to
reduce the number of centuries and to fix some proportion between number
of citizens and centuries up to a _maximum_ of 193 centuries.

Another point, while the idea of classifying through century points is
good, I think no points should be awarded for mere time of presence in
NR. It would be much better to award those points per vote cast which
would really show wich citizens are active, and for a citizen that votes
every time could sum up along the years to the actual value, while the
"dead wood" would en up in the last class not in the 2nd and 3rd like in
the actual system.

Vale,

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Common Law in NR?
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	29 Dec 2001 02:29:34 -0200

On Fri, 2001-12-28 at 18:42, QFabiusMaxmi@-------- wrote:
> In a message dated 12/28/01 8:28:25 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> esteves@-------- writes:
>
>
> > That is how I thought the decision (both juridical and administrative)
> > system worked in Nova Roma, before I read the message from Quintus Fabius,
> > in which he said that Apollonius could not waive the 9 days period for
> > reconsideration because there was no precedent for that.
> >
> > Of course, as you said, a precedent can serve to help the magistrate in
> > judging the case. That is how things work all over the ocidental world. But
> > it cannot pre-determine the judgement. Only the Law can do so.
> >
> > Now all is clear for me. I hope it is clear also to our magistrates and to
> > the Senate. It is a question of great significance, not only an empty
> > juridical discussion. It affects the rights of the citizenry.
> >
> > Valete
> >
> > Atticus
> >
> >
> Salvete
> I was gone during the start this debate, and since have heard a mishmash of
> law quotes including Gaius who is a Principate writer and not from the
> republic to get points across.
> What I said, was neither Flavius or I would let Apollonius Draco waive his 9
> day waiting period, if we were asked. Why? Because it would set a precedent.
> To say that Precedent was not involved in the early Roman Republic is to not
> understand Roman Law. The Table of Twelve was set up by the commission of 10
> (decemvirs) based on tribal precedents, traditions and varies city state
> laws. The idea of a code was Greek, but execution was Roman. Since Romans
> were such traditionalists, they adopted and codified these traditions and
> precedents into Law. However the table had mostly laws to do with the Cult
> of Farmers, since Rome was an agricultural community.
> Such laws do not help NR today, but it is a starting point. I think it would
> be unwise to ignore precedent and tradition. Our early spiritual ancestors
> did not. It would be a vain magistrate who would do so.
> English common law uses precedent but in a different way. These were based
> on tribal customs, and eventually codified into a rigid system, with no
> leeway of decision.


But for the provocatio when the decision of the people was above any
tradition or even written law.
The people in Rome never judged by laws/traditions but on the moment
case by case.
The right of provocatio is given to all roman citizen, then and now,
this is at the same time a great security against abusing magistrates
and a danger when used by populists.

Vale

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Common Law in NR?
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	29 Dec 2001 02:42:40 -0200

On Fri, 2001-12-28 at 22:20, L. Sicinius Drusus wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> I Think this is a good time to bring up just how
> important precedents were to the Romans. Only a small
> part of the traditions that made up the Mos Maiorum
> were ever codified into Roman law, but that didn't
> mean that the Romans didn't feel that they were bound
> by these traditions, which were a set of Precedents
> that our ancestors established, and which were
> considered the proper, the Roman way of doing things.
>
> The Romans were allways reluctant to elect a Novus
> Homo, a man who's ancestors never held high office, it
> was unprecedented for a member of that family to hold
> office.
>
> When a Praetor took office he would start with an
> Edict that established how he would handle cases. It
> was allmost always that he would follow the rules
> established by an earlier Praetor, he was following
> Precedents.
>

He choose to follow precedents, the simple fact that he wrote that edict
shows that he could NOT follow the the porecedents.

> Romans were ruled by tradition in everything from what
> name to give a newborn son to how to conduct your self
> in office. The Cursus Honorium was a tradition, a
> series of Precedents before Sulla the dictator enacted
> it into law late in the Republic, but that didn't stop
> most Romans from following it as rigidly as any lex in
> Satrun's temple.
>

It was a law since the lex Villia (well sort of, through the minimum
ages), but nevertheless several citizens (Marius for ex.) were dispensed
of this law by _the people_ (not the senate). No law or tradition was
above the will of the people.


> The Roman frame of mind respected Precedents, and
> Romans would look down on any magistrate that failed
> to follow the Precedents that were established by his
> precedecessors. He might have the power to legally
> ignore a precedent, but if he did so without a very
> good reason, then his dignitas would suffer.
>

Some romans (mostly the senator class) would look down, but there
was a number of innovating magistrates that were supported by the
commoners.

> Innovation in government was something that Greeks
> might play with, but it was NOT Roman.
>

You mean, the Gracchi, Marius, Caesar, Octavian were not roman ?
You clearly read Rome through the eyes of the Optimates, they were not
the only romans.

Vale

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] an undemocratic Republic
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:54:23 -0600 (CST)

Salve Mani Villi,

> I have the feeling that our number of centuries is to large when
> compared to our population.

I agree. I intend to introduce a lex next month to change the
number of centuries, making it proportional to the number of
eligible voters.

> I think we should have at least 3 citizens/century (in the
> first class, more in the others, thats fine for me).

Currently, even in the first class there are always at least 3
citizens per century. Unfortunately, in most cases, 2 of the 3 don't
bother to vote.

> Another point, while the idea of classifying through century points is
> good, I think no points should be awarded for mere time of presence in
> NR.

I think there should be some award for this, but it should be far
smaller than it is now (perhaps one or two points a year). My future
colleague has been working on a lex to revise century point awards;
hopefully it will include a reduction in "longevity points".

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus
Curator Araneum et Senator, Nova Roma
Senior Consul-Elect, MMDCCLV (2002)

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Common Law in NR?
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:05:43 -0800

Michel Loos wrote:

> On Fri, 2001-12-28 at 22:20, L. Sicinius Drusus wrote:
> > Salvete,
> >
> > I Think this is a good time to bring up just how
> > important precedents were to the Romans. Only a small
> > part of the traditions that made up the Mos Maiorum
> > were ever codified into Roman law, but that didn't
> > mean that the Romans didn't feel that they were bound
> > by these traditions, which were a set of Precedents
> > that our ancestors established, and which were
> > considered the proper, the Roman way of doing things.
> >
> > The Romans were allways reluctant to elect a Novus
> > Homo, a man who's ancestors never held high office, it
> > was unprecedented for a member of that family to hold
> > office.
> >
> > When a Praetor took office he would start with an
> > Edict that established how he would handle cases. It
> > was allmost always that he would follow the rules
> > established by an earlier Praetor, he was following
> > Precedents.
> >
>
> He choose to follow precedents, the simple fact that he wrote that
> edict
> shows that he could NOT follow the the porecedents.
>

Sulla: There is a late Republican law that compelled those magistrates
who issued edicts to follow them. I cannot remember the law offhand but
I will locate it if I must.

>
> > Romans were ruled by tradition in everything from what
> > name to give a newborn son to how to conduct your self
> > in office. The Cursus Honorium was a tradition, a
> > series of Precedents before Sulla the dictator enacted
> > it into law late in the Republic, but that didn't stop
> > most Romans from following it as rigidly as any lex in
> > Satrun's temple.
> >
>
> It was a law since the lex Villia (well sort of, through the minimum
> ages), but nevertheless several citizens (Marius for ex.) were
> dispensed
> of this law by _the people_ (not the senate). No law or tradition was
> above the will of the people.
>

Sulla: You fail to note that C. Marius was elected and broke tradition
and precedent under very trying times. Its amazing what a horde of
Germans can do!

>
>
> > The Roman frame of mind respected Precedents, and
> > Romans would look down on any magistrate that failed
> > to follow the Precedents that were established by his
> > precedecessors. He might have the power to legally
> > ignore a precedent, but if he did so without a very
> > good reason, then his dignitas would suffer.
> >
>
> Some romans (mostly the senator class) would look down, but there
> was a number of innovating magistrates that were supported by the
> commoners.
>

Sulla: I disagree. If you look when most of these "innovations" were
taking place it was already when the Republic was breaking down via
external and internal pressures.

>
> > Innovation in government was something that Greeks
> > might play with, but it was NOT Roman.
> >
>
> You mean, the Gracchi, Marius, Caesar, Octavian were not roman ?
> You clearly read Rome through the eyes of the Optimates, they were not
>
> the only romans.
>

Sulla: Lets examine this a bit further, shall we? What happened to the
Gracchi when they violated tradition and precedent? They died. When
Caius Marius violated precedent it was due to external forces that
compelled Rome and its citizens to do so. (Please see my comment
above.) I dont think Caesar is a good example as he followed the Mos
Maiorum. And as for Octavian once again view the internal and external
factors that compelled Rome to evolve in that direction.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


>
> Vale
>
> Manius Villius Limitanus
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT


>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Arts and Crafts
From:	"Marcus Traianus Valerius" <traiania@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 21:30:56 -0600

Savle,

I would also be interested. My girlfriend's daughter is just getting into "crafts" and I would like to show her some of the history and give her a Roman avenue for creation.

Pax.
mTv

----- Original Message -----
From: asseri@--------
To: novaroma@--------
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Arts and Crafts


In a message dated 12/24/01 4:45:29 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
esteves@-------- writes:


> Is there any sodalitas for such make-it-yourself-like-the-romans-did thing?
>
> Valete
>
> Titus Horatius Atticus
>
>
Salvete,
I fear there is not such a group at this time or if there is I have
missed it. Though many of us to make things and are always experimenting .
By my own inclination I am a crafter of various mediums , I love to make a
mess for a good cause! Truely I would very much like to discuss theses
aspects of Nova Roma .

Is there interest in this beside we two?

Prima Fabia Drusila


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


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] archives
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 22:37:55 -0500

Salve,

>Martins-Esteves at esteves@-------- wrote:
>
> Please help: how can I have access to the archives of the Main List?

Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma/. Once you are there go to the
bottom of the page. Here you will find a table with the months of the year
and the number of posts in a given month. Just click on the month you want
to view to see the archives. Hope this helps.

Vale,

"Quamquam cupido sit delictum ab suis crebro est mater virtutum"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Aedile Curule Elect
Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
Canada Orientalis Provincia

Canada Orientalis Website:
www25.brinkster.com/canorien/

Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
--

Subject:	[novaroma] Lex for Century Points (was:undemocratic Republic)
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?M=20Arminius=20Maior?= <marminius@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 00:39:16 -0300 (ART)

--- Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
escreveu: > Salve Mani Villi,
> > Another point, while the idea of classifying
> through century points is
> > good, I think no points should be awarded for mere
> time of presence in
> > NR.
>
> I think there should be some award for this, but it
> should be far
> smaller than it is now (perhaps one or two points a
> year). My future
> colleague has been working on a lex to revise
> century point awards;
> hopefully it will include a reduction in "longevity
> points".

MAIOR: Since i am a censorial scribe in charge of
century points, i am directly interested in this
issue. I believe that we need a new Law for the
century points; Sulla, how is your revision of the
century points awards? Do you nedd some help?

> Vale, Octavius.
> --
> Marcus Octavius Germanicus
> Curator Araneum et Senator, Nova Roma
> Senior Consul-Elect, MMDCCLV (2002)

Vale
Marcus Arminius Maior
Censorial scribe

_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tenha seu lugar na Web. Construa hoje mesmo sua home page no Yahoo! GeoCities. É fácil e grátis!
http://br.geocities.yahoo.com/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex for Century Points (was:undemocratic Republic)
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:09:53 -0800

Ave Marcus Arminius et al,

M Arminius Maior wrote:

> --- Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
> escreveu: > Salve Mani Villi,
> > > Another point, while the idea of classifying
> > through century points is
> > > good, I think no points should be awarded for mere
> > time of presence in
> > > NR.
> >
> > I think there should be some award for this, but it
> > should be far
> > smaller than it is now (perhaps one or two points a
> > year). My future
> > colleague has been working on a lex to revise
> > century point awards;
> > hopefully it will include a reduction in "longevity
> > points".
>
> MAIOR: Since i am a censorial scribe in charge of
> century points, i am directly interested in this
> issue. I believe that we need a new Law for the
> century points; Sulla, how is your revision of the
> century points awards? Do you nedd some help?
>

Sulla: Early next year I am going to implement some of the changes I
have had. Please contact me off list M. Arminius and we can work on
this together.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

>
> > Vale, Octavius.
> > --
> > Marcus Octavius Germanicus
> > Curator Araneum et Senator, Nova Roma
> > Senior Consul-Elect, MMDCCLV (2002)
>
> Vale
> Marcus Arminius Maior
> Censorial scribe
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! GeoCities
> Tenha seu lugar na Web. Construa hoje mesmo sua home page no Yahoo!
> GeoCities. É fácil e grátis!
> http://br.geocities.yahoo.com/
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT


>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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

Subject:	[novaroma] NR Undemocratic/voting
From:	Quintus Cornelius Caesar <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:05:02 -0800 (PST)

Ave,
After reading this:
--- Caius Cornelius Puteanus <puteus@-------->
wrote:
"about 300 people vote on a population of 1150 cives
and when we look at the Centuriate they are divided in
193 centuriae. 300 voters is a large turnout and means
that approximately 30-40 centuries have no voters at
all and that all the rest has voters in it. This
leaves us with about 150 centuriae."

I was wondering, nevermind what may be
undemocratic, since nothing is truly democratic, what
can be done to increase the number of voters...30-40
centuries may be a small minority (depending on your
point of view) out of 193 centuries but I think our
concern should not be with any undemocratic practices,
but rather with increasing the voting. 30-40
centuries is a small fragment of 193 but alone it is
still a large number of centuries. What if we were to
lower that number to 10-20 I think it would reflect
the participation and interest even more....though
these are just my thoughts....what's everyone else's
thoughts?
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] an undemocratic Republic
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Fri, 28 Dec 2001 23:08:20 -0500

Salvete Manius Villius et Cives,

> Manius Villius Limitanus at loos@-------- wrote:
>
> Another point, while the idea of classifying through century points is
> good, I think no points should be awarded for mere time of presence in
> NR.

I believe this has it's place. Although, I think we currently place way too
much importance on length of time as a citizen. Century points should be
given in this area, but I would like to see the amount lowered.

> It would be much better to award those points per vote cast which
> would really show wich citizens are active, and for a citizen that votes
> every time could sum up along the years to the actual value, while the
> "dead wood" would en up in the last class not in the 2nd and 3rd like in
> the actual system.

This is a wonderful proposal. The action of voting itself shows much more
commitment than simply being on a citizen list. Half the people here that
are registered as citizens are not committed to Nova Roma. That is a simple
fact that we must realise. I know many other newer citizens that disserve
the points that are given to older inactive citizens. These old inactive
citizens are simply being awarded for being inactive. Again, I could rant
on, and on, about inactive citizens, inactive voters, inactive paters. But I
will spare you from this. =)

This proposal is simply fairer to those citizens that are truly committed
and vote. This system would award the citizens that disserve to be awarded.
This would effectively give the committed citizens more of a say in our
nation. I hope this is something we can see put into action in the future. I
think we would find that our century system would be far more efficient than
it is today if we made this proposal a reality.

Valete,

"Quamquam cupido sit delictum ab suis crebro est mater virtutum"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Aedile Curule Elect
Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
Canada Orientalis Provincia

Canada Orientalis Website:
www25.brinkster.com/canorien/

Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
--

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] an undemocratic Republic
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 05:08:58 EST

In a message dated 12/28/01 6:45:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,
loos@-------- writes:


> Salve,
>
> yes NR is rather faithfull to old Roma.
> And this is a form of democracy: geometric democracy (Cf Thales).
> There is absolutely no problem with this.
>
> I have the feeling that our number of centuries is to large when
> compared to our population.
> Roma, while a small town of the Latium, probably with a population
> comparable to ours in its beginnings did not start with the full 193
> centuries. I think we should have at least 3 citizens/century (in the
> first class, more in the others, thats fine for me). It would be fine to
> reduce the number of centuries and to fix some proportion between number
> of citizens and centuries up to a _maximum_ of 193 centuries.
>
> Another point, while the idea of classifying through century points is
> good, I think no points should be awarded for mere time of presence in
> NR. It would be much better to award those points per vote cast which
> would really show wich citizens are active, and for a citizen that votes
> every time could sum up along the years to the actual value, while the
> "dead wood" would en up in the last class not in the 2nd and 3rd like in
> the actual system.
>
> Vale,
>
>
>
Salvete citizens!
A historic moment. Manius Villius Limitanus and I agree on something!
Yes, there are three civies in each first class century, but they must all
vote for the system to work. So far that is not the case. Both Cornelius
Sulla and Marcus Octavious have vowed to remedy this.
As for rewarding longevity in citizenship with points, I believe there should
some reward for sticking with the republic. It doesn't have to be very big,
however.
Cornelius has promised to look into this. Remember citizens Rome was not
built in a day. We move forward step by step.
Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus


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




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

Subject:	[novaroma] Century points for Voting, not for passivity!
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:01:09 +0100

Salvete Quirites!

I have discussed this with Ilustrus Marcus Arminius Maior in his capacity
as a Censorial Scribe a reward for voting instead. He discussed this with a
couple of persons and summerized this issue thus:

Your commentaries about Century Points inspired me to
take a look at the Lex Centuriata. There are my
thoughts, inspired in opinions of Sulla, Labienus and
yourself:

---------------------------------------
Suggested criteria for distributing Century Points:

many more paragraphs .............................
...........................................................

b. Time of citizenship

-With 12 completed months of citizenship, a cive will
have a total of 10 CPs, doesnt matter if he voted once
or no.
with 24 completed months of citizenship, a cive will
receive 10 extra CPs only if he voted in at least one
annual election (december). So, he would have two
opportunities to vote:
.if he doesnt vote at least in one annual
election, he will remain with a total of 10 CPs.
.if he voted once in this two years, we will
receive their 10 extra CPs, with a total of 20 CPs.
. and so on, the cive will receive 10 extra CPs
for every set of year/election, until he haves at
least 6 years of citizenship and 5 participations on
elections.

- citizen for 0 to 5 months
2 CP
- citizen for 6 to 11 months
2+3= 5 CP total
- citizen for 12 to 23 months
5+5= 10 CP total

.......................................
.......................

In this proposal each citizen will recieve a limited amount of points for
the time being a citizens, though he will get a lot more points for voting.

No point for being passive. The basic thought with the century point system
is to reward activity. This reversion does this. I also think that the
century points of all citizen should be counted that way back to the
beginning if possible. That would mean that dead "meat citizens" would
loose a lot of century points.

>> Another point, while the idea of classifying through century points is
>> good, I think no points should be awarded for mere time of presence in
>> NR.
>
>I think there should be some award for this, but it should be far
>smaller than it is now (perhaps one or two points a year). My future
>colleague has been working on a lex to revise century point awards;
>hopefully it will include a reduction in "longevity points".
>
>Vale, Octavius.
>
>--
>Marcus Octavius Germanicus
>Curator Araneum et Senator, Nova Roma
>Senior Consul-Elect, MMDCCLV (2002)
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=215002.1818248.3328688.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:
>HM/A=847665/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vbW9uc3RlcjcuZGF0=1009594465%3eM=215
>002.1818248.3328688.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/A=847665/R=1>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Curule Aedile designatus
still Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://thule.novaroma.org/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that doesn't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Site addition
From:	Lucilla Cornelia Cinna <CorneliaLucilla@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:07:32 +0100

Salve M. Octavi Germanice Consul designate Senator,

great idea, Curator Araneae! I particularly love the new marble
background which looks much better than the old one. :o)

The website of the Sodalitas Egressus
(http://bibliothecagermanica.de/SodalitasEgressus/) also contains a
short introduction to Nova Roma as a whole, providing a short list of
information about the Sodalitates so far established:
http://bibliothecagermanica.de/SodalitasEgressus/html/NR_sodalitates.html
It took me ages to collect the data - now I stand before you, asking all
cives NovaRomani to help M. Octavius and me fill the gaps in the
listings. Thank you very much in advance!

Bene valete!

Lucilla Cornelia Cinna _
====================== \\
Quaestrix C. Flavio Diocletiano Praetori /\~/\ / )
Propraetori Provinciae Germaniae ( )~~~----...,, __/ /
Procuratrix Provinciae Germaniae \` ´/ /
Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus \v/ _____( |
Musaea collegiorum Calliopes Cliusque / \| |~~~~´ \ \ \
Sodalitatis Musarum ( ( | | ) /\ )
Civis NovaRomana \_\| | _/ / _| |
Auctrix Bibliotheca Germaniae /__/ /__/ /__/
http://www.BibliothecaGermanica.de/

Subject:	[novaroma] Precedents as a menace
From:	"Martins-Esteves" <esteves@-------->
Date:	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 20:29:49 -0200

Salve L.Sicini
Salvete Quirites



I brought the issue precedents to the ML out of practical/political reasons. Q. Fabius wrote that Apollonius Draco could not resign the 9 days period for reconsideration because there was <<no precedent>> for that. Obviously the point is neither Lex Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda (it is very wise to grant people nine days to meditate), nor Apollonius or Q. Fabius. My point is: do precedents have the power of law in NR? That is, are they able to impose duties (or even grant rights) over the cives?

The danger behind the precedents is the continuity of things. Let's face the fact that some of our Magistrates are somewhat conservatives. The only hope of the progressists lies on voting. Well, if the the progressists we vote for are also tied up with the precedents, how are we supposed to change things? Of course a magistrate can orient his judgements by the precedents, but he should not feel compeled to do so.

The Law is thus a garantee for us citizens. And so must be. By the simple reading of the Tabularium one must know what to expect when proposing an actio or a general request. But what if the progressist Praetor I voted for this year (hypothesis) is bound by the precedents set by the previous conservative Praetores?

I don't see NR as a game. I see our Republic as a very promising alternative to all of us in the future world. That is: when a Brazilian is in passion for Germany, e.g., he or she can try to emigrate. However if Ancient Rome is his passion, there is nothing left but books, some ruins and our Nova Roma. It is our duty to strive to make it a pleasant place to live.

Valete

Atticus


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] archives
From:	"Martins-Esteves" <esteves@-------->
Date:	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 20:57:05 -0200

Salve Am. Claudi aliique


<<Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma/. Once you are there go to the
bottom of the page. Here you will find a table with the months of the year
and the number of posts in a given month. Just click on the month you want
to view to see the archives. Hope this helps.>>


Thanks. In fact I had already tried doing this, but there are no links on the table with the months. I tried also signing in, but it didn't work either.
Perhaps our Curatrix could help.


Valete

Atticus







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

Subject:	[novaroma] Assistant Positions in the Staff of the Praefecta Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus
From:	Lucilla Cornelia Cinna <CorneliaLucilla@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:05:52 +0100

Salvete Quirites!

------------------------- English / Englisch --------------------------

Being assigned Praefecta Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus I will need hands
and quick and open minds to fulfill the duties of this office. Therefore
- according to the guidelines given by M. Minucius Audens Praefectus
Fabrum Sodalitatis Egressus - I announce 3 vacant positions in my staff:

1 Praefectus Auxiliaris Retarius - the person interested should have
basic HTML and Java Script skills to make webpages on her/his own as
well as some skills in graphic designs, additional (basic) Latin skills
will be highly appreciated, but are not necessary, basic skills in more
than one language besides English will be welcome, since I want to see
other language versions of the site online within next year.

2 Scriba Retarii - someone who can spend a couple of hours per month
researching on the web; (basic) Latin skills and historic knowledge will
be highly appreciated, but are not necessary, basic skills in more than
one language besides English will be welcome, since I want to see other
language versions of the site online within next year.

All applicants must be cives NovaRomani and members of the Sodalitas
Egressus or at least willing to become members of this Sodalitas.

For a glimpse of what is waiting for you, take a look at the site:
http://bibliothecagermanica.de/SodalitasEgressus/

Thank you for listening, and please contact me privately, if you are
interested.

------------------------- German / Deutsch ----------------------------

Als soeben offiziell ernannte Praefecta Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus
werde ich fleißige Hände und rasche und kluge Köpfe benötigen, um die
Pflichten dieses Amtes ausfüllen zu können. Von daher - in
Übereinstimmung mit den Richtlinien, wie sie M. Minucius Audens
Praefectus Fabrum Sodalitatis Egressus gesetzt hat - kündige ich hiermit
3 offene Positionen in meinem Stab an:

1 Praefectus Auxiliaris Retarius - Interessenten sollten über
Grundkenntnisse in HTML und Java Script verfügen, um selbständig
Webseiten erstellen zu können, ebenso Grundkenntnisse in Grafik und
Gestaltung; zusätzliche Latein-(Grund-)Kenntnisse würden freudig begrüßt
werden, sind aber keine Voraussetzung; Grundkenntnisse in mehr als einer
Sprache neben Englisch würden willkommen sein, da ich fremdsprachige
Versionen der Site innerhalb des nächsten Jahres online sehen möchte.

2 Scriba Retarii - Interessenten sollten bereit und imstande sein,
einige Stunden im Monat mit Recherchen im Internet zuzubringen;
Latein-(Grund-)Kenntnisse würden freudig begrüßt werden, sind aber keine
Voraussetzung; Grundkenntnisse in mehr als einer Sprache neben Englisch
würden willkommen sein, da ich fremdsprachige Versionen der Site
innerhalb des nächsten Jahres online sehen möchte.

Alle Bewerber müssen Cives NovaRomani sein und zusätzlich Mitglieder der
Sodalitas Egressus oder zumindest bereit sein, für die Zeit ihres
Amtsausübung Mitglieder dieser Sodalitas zu sein.

Um einen kleinen Eindruck davon zu bekommen, was euch erwartet, werft
bitte einen Blick auf die Site:
http://bibliothecagermanica.de/SodalitasEgressus/

Vielen Dank für's Zuhören - und bitte meldet euch bei Interesse privat
bei mir.

Bene valete!

Lucilla Cornelia Cinna _
====================== \\
Quaestrix C. Flavio Diocletiano Praetori /\~/\ / )
Propraetori Provinciae Germaniae ( )~~~----...,, __/ /
Procuratrix Provinciae Germaniae \` ´/ /
Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus \v/ _____( |
Musaea collegiorum Calliopes Cliusque / \| |~~~~´ \ \ \
Sodalitatis Musarum ( ( | | ) /\ )
Civis NovaRomana \_\| | _/ / _| |
Auctrix Bibliotheca Germaniae /__/ /__/ /__/
http://www.BibliothecaGermanica.de/









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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] archives
From:	Piparskeggr - Venator <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:11:17 -0600

Salus et fortuna Atticus,

Martins-Esteves wrote:
>
> Salve Am. Claudi aliique
>
> Thanks. In fact I had already tried doing this, but there are no links on the table with the months. I tried also signing in, but it didn't work either.
> Perhaps our Curatrix could help.
>
> Valete
>
> Atticus
>

Hmmm, I just tried the month table link and it worked fine.

Might be a browser or a Yahoo problem. Sometimes I am unable to activate links with mouse
clicks, and have to restart the computer to reset the mouse capabilities.

--
=========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Cives Nova Romana et Paterfamilias
Domus Familias
http://www.geocities.com/gens_ulleria/index.html

Known as Stafngrímr Oxlegs by discerning Vikings,
somewhere ,-)

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Legio Romana
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <tjalens.h@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:46:30 +0100

>Salvete qvirites omnes!
>
>I amn interested in create the Legio of my province, but I dont know
>how I can register it in the list of Legions of Nova Roma.
>I m Kaeso Qvintvs Bellicvs from Argentina province..
>Thanks!
>
>Valete qvirites omnes!


Salve Kaeso Qvintvs!

I was trying to found a Legio in Thule as its Propraetor a couple of months
ago. But forced to do it as a privatus, by a consular intercessio. Which I
did, I will send You the Regula of this Legio VII "Res Publica" if You are
interested.

Auctor Legionis


and

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Curule Aedile designatus
still Quaestor of Nova Roma
Propraetor of Thule

The Opinions expressed are my own,
and not an offical opinion of Nova Roma
************************************************
The homepage of the Nova Roma Provincia Thule:
http://thule.novaroma.org/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Do not give in to hate. That leads to the dark side."
************************************************
Caeso, he who also is known as Christer Edling.
************************************************
Using a keyboard that doesn't want to make L! :-(
************************************************
PRIVATE PHONE: +90 - 10 09 10

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Precedents as a menace
From:	Matthias Stappert <3s@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:58:54 +0100

Salvete Omnes,
Salve, Attice.

Please allow me some remarks:


> I brought the issue precedents to the ML out of practical/political reasons. Q. Fabius wrote that Apollonius Draco could not resign the 9 days period for reconsideration because there was <<no precedent>> for that. Obviously the point is neither Lex Cornelia et Maria De Civitate Eiuranda (it is very wise to grant people nine days to meditate), nor Apollonius or Q. Fabius. My point is: do precedents have the power of law in NR? That is, are they able to impose duties (or even grant rights) over the cives?

CFD: Precedents can have the power of law, of course. This point of view
is quite controversial, I know. See: We have a developing system of Law,
and with law I mean leges, edictae and the consitution. It can be that a
law doesn´t give answer to a specific problem a magistrate with imperium
have to deal with. Here he has to decide by discretion, inside the
boundaries of the law and it´s intention. This is the difficulty in that
work. He sets up a precedent following magistrates have to obey.

With "power of law" I don´t mean that this precedent "is law", but it
imposes duties to magistrates and perhaps the citizens and can grant
rights.

Q. Fabius´ anwer was correct: Draco cannot waive his 9 days because
there is no precedent. The law grants him this period, and he cannot
waive this right. He can simply wait until the 9 days are over.

> The danger behind the precedents is the continuity of things.

CFD: Continuity gives also security to the whole community. People
always fear rapid changes.

>Let's face the fact that some of our Magistrates are somewhat conservatives. The only hope of the progressists lies on voting.
> Well, if the the progressists we vote for are also tied up with the precedents, how are we supposed to change things? Of course a magistrate can orient his judgements by the precedents, but he should not feel compeled to do so.

CFD: As said, precedents have a form of binding power. A citizen coming
to the Praetors with a claim has the right of the same judgement another
citizen with the same claim, based on the same matters of fact, has
received. Any other decision would lead the way to future arbitrary
acts.
Precedents have their power until a new lex or edict regulates the case
in another way the precedent does. So more progressive law erases
precedents which are opposite to it.

> The Law is thus a garantee for us citizens. And so must be. By the simple reading of the Tabularium one must know what to expect when proposing an actio or a general request. But what if the progressist Praetor I voted for this year (hypothesis) is bound by the precedents set by the previous conservative Praetores?

CFD: See above. He´s bound, of course, to secure continuity of life and
deny arbitrariness.

> I don't see NR as a game. I see our Republic as a very promising alternative to all of us in the future world. That is: when a Brazilian is in passion for Germany, e.g., he or she can try to emigrate. However if Ancient Rome is his passion, there is nothing left but books, some ruins and our Nova Roma. It is our duty to strive to make it a pleasant place to live.

CFD: This is a statement I fully support. See: Our law system isn´t
fully developed yet. For this our republic isn´t old enough. So far we
have to look on precedents and the benefits (and dangers, of course)
they gives us. A magistrate can set up new precedents, and even erase
old precedents, if they were against the law or obviously wrong. I
personally think that precedents gives us more security and the yearly
changing magistrates some necessary help for their work.

Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Praetor, Senator

Subject:	[novaroma] R: an undemocratic Republic - IMHO
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:35:50 +0100

Franciscus Apulus Caesar omnibus S.P.D.

>From Encilopedia Generale Mondadori and Giovanni Sartori - Columbia
University (NY) [sorry for the translation]:
"Democracy is a principle legitimacy, is an ideal, is a politic system where
the power is of the people....
The power is legitimated, conditioneted and revoked by free, equal and
periodically elections.... The democracy don't accept the power comes to the
force....
In a democracy all the members have the same rights, powers, possibilities."

>From Oxford Dictionary:
"dem.oc.racy /dmkrsi; AmE -mk-/ noun (pl. -ies)
1 [U] a system of government in which all the people of a country can vote
to elect their representatives: parliamentary democracy the principles of
democracy
2 [C] a country which has this system of government: Western democracies I
thought we were supposed to be living in a democracy.
3 [U] fair and equal treatment of everyone in an organization, etc., and
their right to take part in making decisions: the fight for justice and
democracy "

>From Merriam Webster's Dictionary:
"de·moc·ra·cy
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek
dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
Date: 1576
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a
government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised
by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually
involving periodically held free elections
.....
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges"

This is my PERSONAL idea of democracy too.
IMHO a democracy election system is based on the "1 person / 1 vote". There
isn't democracy when my vote value 1/4 of a Magistrate's vote. Democracy
isn't class division but equal opportunity to all the citizens not being of
a "superior" class. Ancient Rome was *democratic* maybe only in the late Res
Publica, when patrician were equal to plebeian. But Nova Roma want to
re-nact not this period. Something of this political system was perfect 2000
years ago and Ancient Rome lived for many time because it was as "flexible"
as able to change with the events and time. Now we live in a "democratic"
world where a system like NR is un-democratic and we must be able to change
ourself like Ancient Rome. You don't see the real mean of this word and how
Nova Roma could present as a real nation to the world if our democracy is
different by the modern and universally accepted idea? We have to "conquer
th world" not by the army but by the ideas and our general idea is back from
2000 years.
I talked about another "democratic society" because Nova Roma is not my
PERSONAL idea of democracy and not just in the election system.

> The leges ruling the Comitiae are faithful to Roma antiqua and try to
reward
> those who actively contribute to the fulfillment of our mission. So,
please
> let the 'undemocratic' argument drop, it has very little value here...

No because this is my personal idea and my right. The democracy is freedom
of speach and thing.
IMHO The Democracy Content haven't so "little value here" because there are
many people thing like me and talk not here. And IMHO SVR is the signal of a
(maybe little) discontent of this "imaginated oligarchic system". Many
people go out from NR for this, I'm here trying to open the politic mind of
some people (I'm here to search, learn and grow myelf too).
And you must remember there was a lot of men thinging "different" in Ancient
Rome and they changed the histiry. :-)

> I explicitely didn't reply to this person to not make this into something
> personal, it is merely meant as a light consideration to become a bit more
> realistic ;-)

About the policy I'm realistic more of all of you! ;-)))

About the low number of centuries voting I thing the number of Nova Romans
isn't correct and real. We must do a census of the active people to
understand the real number of citizens. How many people are yet interest to
Nova Roma? How many people are real active? How many people are interest to
continue to be citizen? After we could cancel the citizenship of the people
incative more than 12 months, for example.

Happy new "democratic" year ;-)))))))))))))

P.S.: This is my personal and maybe wrong ideas as simple Nova Roman
citizen

Valete
Franciscus Caesar Apulus

Subject:	[novaroma] Market Day, 29 December 2754
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:58:59 -0600 (CST)

Salvete Omnes,

Today is a Market Day; therefore all citizens are invited to
participate in the regularly scheduled chat sessions.

Typically, when this takes place on a weekday, most Europeans
are able to attend the first session and Americans able to
attend the second, due to their work/sleep schedules.
On a Saturday, however, it is much more likely that more
citizens will be at both sessions.

Starting times for the two sessions are:

I. 8pm Roma, 7pm UK, 2pm US/Eastern

II. 9pm US/Eastern, 6pm Pacific

Valete, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus
Curator Araneum et Senator, Nova Roma
Senior Consul-Elect, MMDCCLV (2002)




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] R: an undemocratic Republic - IMHO
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	29 Dec 2001 19:41:18 -0200

On Sat, 2001-12-29 at 13:35, Franciscus Apulus Caesar wrote:
> Franciscus Apulus Caesar omnibus S.P.D.
>
> From Encilopedia Generale Mondadori and Giovanni Sartori - Columbia
> University (NY) [sorry for the translation]:
> "Democracy is a principle legitimacy, is an ideal, is a politic system where
> the power is of the people....
> The power is legitimated, conditioneted and revoked by free, equal and
> periodically elections.... The democracy don't accept the power comes to the
> force....
> In a democracy all the members have the same rights, powers, possibilities."
>
> From Oxford Dictionary:
> "dem.oc.racy /dmkrsi; AmE -mk-/ noun (pl. -ies)
> 1 [U] a system of government in which all the people of a country can vote
> to elect their representatives: parliamentary democracy the principles of
> democracy
> 2 [C] a country which has this system of government: Western democracies I
> thought we were supposed to be living in a democracy.
> 3 [U] fair and equal treatment of everyone in an organization, etc., and
> their right to take part in making decisions: the fight for justice and
> democracy "
>
> From Merriam Webster's Dictionary:
> "de·moc·ra·cy
> Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek
> dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
> Date: 1576
> 1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a
> government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised
> by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually
> involving periodically held free elections
> .....
> 5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges"
>
> This is my PERSONAL idea of democracy too.
> IMHO a democracy election system is based on the "1 person / 1 vote". There
> isn't democracy when my vote value 1/4 of a Magistrate's vote. Democracy
> isn't class division but equal opportunity to all the citizens not being of
> a "superior" class. Ancient Rome was *democratic* maybe only in the late Res
> Publica, when patrician were equal to plebeian.

The plebeian/patrician issue was settled as early as the IVth century BC
(early republic). The struggle of the IInd and Ist cent. were about
rich/poor not plebeain/patrician.
Never in Roman History was there an isonomy (arithmetic democraty)

> But Nova Roma want to
> re-nact not this period. Something of this political system was perfect 2000
> years ago and Ancient Rome lived for many time because it was as "flexible"
> as able to change with the events and time. Now we live in a "democratic"
> world where a system like NR is un-democratic and we must be able to change
> ourself like Ancient Rome.

un-democratic in a specific sense of the word. Only the Mondadori
definition speaks of "equal" votes.

> You don't see the real mean of this word and how
> Nova Roma could present as a real nation to the world if our democracy is
> different by the modern and universally accepted idea?

There are many "real nations" that don't use your definition of
democracy (or no democracy at all).


> We have to "conquer
> th world" not by the army but by the ideas and our general idea is back from
> 2000 years.
> I talked about another "democratic society" because Nova Roma is not my
> PERSONAL idea of democracy and not just in the election system.
>
> > The leges ruling the Comitiae are faithful to Roma antiqua and try to
> reward
> > those who actively contribute to the fulfillment of our mission. So,
> please
> > let the 'undemocratic' argument drop, it has very little value here...
>
> No because this is my personal idea and my right. The democracy is freedom
> of speach and thing.

That is a totally different point. Freedom (of speech, credo etc.) is
essential, and not respected here on this list.

> IMHO The Democracy Content haven't so "little value here" because there are
> many people thing like me and talk not here. And IMHO SVR is the signal of a
> (maybe little) discontent of this "imaginated oligarchic system". Many
> people go out from NR for this, I'm here trying to open the politic mind of
> some people (I'm here to search, learn and grow myelf too).

Thanks.

> And you must remember there was a lot of men thinging "different" in Ancient
> Rome and they changed the histiry. :-)
>
> > I explicitely didn't reply to this person to not make this into something
> > personal, it is merely meant as a light consideration to become a bit more
> > realistic ;-)
>
> About the policy I'm realistic more of all of you! ;-)))
>
> About the low number of centuries voting I thing the number of Nova Romans
> isn't correct and real. We must do a census of the active people to
> understand the real number of citizens. How many people are yet interest to
> Nova Roma? How many people are real active? How many people are interest to
> continue to be citizen? After we could cancel the citizenship of the people
> incative more than 12 months, for example.
>
> Happy new "democratic" year ;-)))))))))))))
>
> P.S.: This is my personal and maybe wrong ideas as simple Nova Roman
> citizen
>

You are entitled to your ideas. But I think NR wants to recreate the
Roman political system and they just don't fit. Is the roman system
better than the modern democratic one ? I don't know, we are in a
laboratory here and will see in the long run.

Salve,

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Common Law in NR?
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	29 Dec 2001 19:57:40 -0200

On Sat, 2001-12-29 at 00:05, Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix wrote:
>
>
> Michel Loos wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2001-12-28 at 22:20, L. Sicinius Drusus wrote:
> > > Salvete,
> > >
> > > I Think this is a good time to bring up just how
> > > important precedents were to the Romans. Only a small
> > > part of the traditions that made up the Mos Maiorum
> > > were ever codified into Roman law, but that didn't
> > > mean that the Romans didn't feel that they were bound
> > > by these traditions, which were a set of Precedents
> > > that our ancestors established, and which were
> > > considered the proper, the Roman way of doing things.
> > >
> > > The Romans were allways reluctant to elect a Novus
> > > Homo, a man who's ancestors never held high office, it
> > > was unprecedented for a member of that family to hold
> > > office.
> > >
> > > When a Praetor took office he would start with an
> > > Edict that established how he would handle cases. It
> > > was allmost always that he would follow the rules
> > > established by an earlier Praetor, he was following
> > > Precedents.
> > >
> >
> > He choose to follow precedents, the simple fact that he wrote that
> > edict
> > shows that he could NOT follow the the porecedents.
> >
>
> Sulla: There is a late Republican law that compelled those magistrates
> who issued edicts to follow them. I cannot remember the law offhand but
> I will locate it if I must.
>
> >
> > > Romans were ruled by tradition in everything from what
> > > name to give a newborn son to how to conduct your self
> > > in office. The Cursus Honorium was a tradition, a
> > > series of Precedents before Sulla the dictator enacted
> > > it into law late in the Republic, but that didn't stop
> > > most Romans from following it as rigidly as any lex in
> > > Satrun's temple.
> > >
> >
> > It was a law since the lex Villia (well sort of, through the minimum
> > ages), but nevertheless several citizens (Marius for ex.) were
> > dispensed
> > of this law by _the people_ (not the senate). No law or tradition was
> > above the will of the people.
> >
>
> Sulla: You fail to note that C. Marius was elected and broke tradition
> and precedent under very trying times. Its amazing what a horde of
> Germans can do!
>
> >
> >
> > > The Roman frame of mind respected Precedents, and
> > > Romans would look down on any magistrate that failed
> > > to follow the Precedents that were established by his
> > > precedecessors. He might have the power to legally
> > > ignore a precedent, but if he did so without a very
> > > good reason, then his dignitas would suffer.
> > >
> >
> > Some romans (mostly the senator class) would look down, but there
> > was a number of innovating magistrates that were supported by the
> > commoners.
> >
>
> Sulla: I disagree. If you look when most of these "innovations" were
> taking place it was already when the Republic was breaking down via
> external and internal pressures.
>

There were innovations all along roman history, from the kingdom down to
the dominate. It is with the help of those innovation that Rome survived
nearly 2 millenaries (counting Byzance), the states which did not allow
innovation like Sparta were totally unable to adapt to new times and
survived only for a few centuries.
Let see some early innovation:
Kingdom -> Republic
Tribunes of the plebs (20 years)
10 tables (50 years)
no more consuls but military tribunes with consular power (50 years)
back to consuls but including plebeains (30 years)
Instauration of the cursus honorum (50 years)
we are now at the beginning of the IInd century and all the innovation
due to the administration of an empire (propraetors, breaking the laws
of the CH etc.) some 50 years more and we are in the time of "the
breaking down republic" with the Gracchi, Marius, Sulla, Pompeius,
Caesar and Octavian nearly without interruption.

Where exactly do you place the quiet time without innovations?

> >
> > > Innovation in government was something that Greeks
> > > might play with, but it was NOT Roman.
> > >
> >
> > You mean, the Gracchi, Marius, Caesar, Octavian were not roman ?
> > You clearly read Rome through the eyes of the Optimates, they were not
> >
> > the only romans.
> >
>
> Sulla: Lets examine this a bit further, shall we? What happened to the
> Gracchi when they violated tradition and precedent? They died.

Murdered by the conservatives. Is this a menace?

> When
> Caius Marius violated precedent it was due to external forces that
> compelled Rome and its citizens to do so.

And when Scipio Africanus Aemilianus violated it some 50 years before
what was the reason?

> (Please see my comment
> above.) I dont think Caesar is a good example as he followed the Mos
> Maiorum.

Not in political matter.

> And as for Octavian once again view the internal and external
> factors that compelled Rome to evolve in that direction.
>

external factors? the internal ones he created them himself in order to
justify his actions.

Vale,

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	[novaroma] Absentia
From:	Michel Loos <loos@-------->
Date:	29 Dec 2001 20:08:06 -0200

Salve,

I just was able to get my fares and will travel to Germania Superior
tomorrow. Therefor I will be unable to check my mail for 2 weeks,
starting tomoorow morning.

By the way anything roman going on in Germania Superior those next days
(near Colmar/Basel/Freiburg) ?

Vale,

Manius Villius Limitanus

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Assistant Positions in the Staff of the Praefecta Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus
From:	Quintus Cornelius Caesar <qccaesar@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:47:58 -0800 (PST)

Ave,
I would be willing to assist you in regards to
the second position you offered, Scriba Retarii, I can
speak French fairly well as a language outside of
English. If this is what you are looking for I'd be
willing to help.
vale,
Quintus Cornelius Caesar
--- Lucilla Cornelia Cinna <CorneliaLucilla@-------->
wrote:
> Salvete Quirites!
>
> ------------------------- English / Englisch
> -------------------------->
2 Scriba Retarii - someone who can spend a couple of
> hours per month
> researching on the web; (basic) Latin skills and
> historic knowledge will
> be highly appreciated, but are not necessary, basic
> skills in more than
> one language besides English will be welcome, since
> I want to see other
> language versions of the site online within next
> year.
>
> All applicants must be cives NovaRomani and members
> of the Sodalitas
> Egressus or at least willing to become members of
> this Sodalitas.
>
> For a glimpse of what is waiting for you, take a
> look at the site:
> http://bibliothecagermanica.de/SodalitasEgressus/
>
> Thank you for listening, and please contact me
> privately, if you are
> interested.
>
> ------------------------- German / Deutsch
> ----------------------------
>
> Als soeben offiziell ernannte Praefecta Retaria
> Sodalitatis Egressus
> werde ich fleißige Hände und rasche und kluge Köpfe
> benötigen, um die
> Pflichten dieses Amtes ausfüllen zu können. Von
> daher - in
> Übereinstimmung mit den Richtlinien, wie sie M.
> Minucius Audens
> Praefectus Fabrum Sodalitatis Egressus gesetzt hat -
> kündige ich hiermit
> 3 offene Positionen in meinem Stab an:
>
> 1 Praefectus Auxiliaris Retarius - Interessenten
> sollten über
> Grundkenntnisse in HTML und Java Script verfügen, um
> selbständig
> Webseiten erstellen zu können, ebenso
> Grundkenntnisse in Grafik und
> Gestaltung; zusätzliche Latein-(Grund-)Kenntnisse
> würden freudig begrüßt
> werden, sind aber keine Voraussetzung;
> Grundkenntnisse in mehr als einer
> Sprache neben Englisch würden willkommen sein, da
> ich fremdsprachige
> Versionen der Site innerhalb des nächsten Jahres
> online sehen möchte.
>
> 2 Scriba Retarii - Interessenten sollten bereit und
> imstande sein,
> einige Stunden im Monat mit Recherchen im Internet
> zuzubringen;
> Latein-(Grund-)Kenntnisse würden freudig begrüßt
> werden, sind aber keine
> Voraussetzung; Grundkenntnisse in mehr als einer
> Sprache neben Englisch
> würden willkommen sein, da ich fremdsprachige
> Versionen der Site
> innerhalb des nächsten Jahres online sehen möchte.
>
> Alle Bewerber müssen Cives NovaRomani sein und
> zusätzlich Mitglieder der
> Sodalitas Egressus oder zumindest bereit sein, für
> die Zeit ihres
> Amtsausübung Mitglieder dieser Sodalitas zu sein.
>
> Um einen kleinen Eindruck davon zu bekommen, was
> euch erwartet, werft
> bitte einen Blick auf die Site:
> http://bibliothecagermanica.de/SodalitasEgressus/
>
> Vielen Dank für's Zuhören - und bitte meldet euch
> bei Interesse privat
> bei mir.
>
> Bene valete!
>
> Lucilla Cornelia Cinna
> _
> ======================
> \\
> Quaestrix C. Flavio Diocletiano Praetori /\~/\
> / )
> Propraetori Provinciae Germaniae (
> )~~~----...,, __/ /
> Procuratrix Provinciae Germaniae \` ´/
> /
> Retaria Sodalitatis Egressus \v/
> _____( |
> Musaea collegiorum Calliopes Cliusque / \|
> |~~~~´ \ \ \
> Sodalitatis Musarum ( ( | |
> ) /\ )
> Civis NovaRomana \_\| |
> _/ / _| |
> Auctrix Bibliotheca Germaniae /__/
> /__/ /__/
> http://www.BibliothecaGermanica.de/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

Subject:	[novaroma] On Precedents as a menace
From:	QFabiusMaxmi@--------
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 17:01:25 EST

In a message dated 12/29/01 5:28:45 AM Pacific Standard Time,
esteves@-------- writes:
Salvete
What does history tell us? Romans are comforted by tradition. We certainly
see this throughout Roman history. In fact Romans will only break tradition,
if their existence is thought to be at stake. Hence the Scipionic reforms,
the neuvo homo Marian changes, Sullan counterchanges, etc. People saw
Augustus as a savior. He halted the civil wars allowed Rome to get back to
normal. How? By embracing tradition.

> My point is: do precedents have the power of law in NR? That is, are they
> able to impose duties (or even grant rights) over the cives?

QFM: I do not believe they have any binding power, until the magistrate
codifies them by
turning them into edicta or leges.
I see them as guideposts if you will, ones that allows a magistrate the
comfort of continuity, if he so desires. They also give the citizens an
understanding of what might occur if the precedent was to be upheld.

A good case in point here was the "Gender Edictum" of last year.
It makes a good test case (as my old law Prof would say).
Here we had 4 censors who had followed an existing idea, even though it was
spoken
not written down. So let's call this an oral tradition. Along comes the
fifth censor who is confronted by this "oral tradition." His imperium offers
him choices.
a.) Uphold the "oral tradition," b.) Ignore it, and start a new oral
tradition. c.) Ignore it and issue an edictum changing tradition. d.)
Uphold it and codify the tradition.

Our Censor picked d. Which started quite an uproar here in NR. Why? Not
because it told the people that any tradition has power to become law. It
was that this was considered by many to be a "bad" tradition, one that needed
changing. And now that it was law it would be that much harder change.


>
> The danger behind the precedents is the continuity of things. Let's face
> the fact that some of our Magistrates are somewhat conservatives. The only
> hope of the progressivists lies on voting. Well, if the progressivists we
> vote for are also tied up with the precedents, how are we supposed to
> change things?

Well, since we have shown that magistrates can change things, what is the
problem?
Our nameless censor did not have to codify the tradition that his imperium
allowed him.
He could have easily ignored the whole thing.


> Of course a magistrate can orient his judgments by the precedents, but he
> should not feel compelled to do so.

And nowhere in the Vedian constitution does it say he must. However,
potential "progressive" magistrates should realize that the Roman annual
leges on offices makes it very hard to initiate sweeping changes. This is a
reflection on the conservative nature of Romans, their fear of tyranny and
their comfort in tradition.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus


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

Subject:	[novaroma] Reflections on my term as Consul
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 17:08:09 -0500

Flavius Vedius Germanicus novaromanis S.P.D.

This past year has been one of profound change for Nova Roma, as well as
profound change in my own perception of the Republic. It is with some pride
I point to the legacy of my year as Consul: the election-system reforms,
amendments to the Constitution currently being voted for ratification by the
Senate, the establishment of a sound fiscal base for our Republic through
the estbalishment of annual dues, the blossoming of face-to-face meetings,
the establishment of the Sodalitas Munerum to develop our own gladiatorial
games to add color and drama to our events, and the departure of those
disruptive individuals who did not share our dream of rebuilding the
Republic. I consider my term of office a success, and believe that I leave
our Republic a better place than it was a year ago.

With that, I find myself both profoundly tired and drawn to my family and
other non-NR facets of my life, and am retiring to private life. I am both
pleased and honored to retain my seat in the Senate, and will as time and
inclination allows offer such comments and wisdom as I may on the business
that finds itself before that August Body. You may not see me here or in the
other everyday fora, but rest assured I will keep an ear to the ground.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Consul

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Reflections on my term as Consul
From:	"Julilla" <curatrix@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:00:07 -0000

I'd like to take a moment to sincerely thank Flavius Vedius
Germanicus and all outgoing magistrati for their selfless service
this past year. I well know that leaders often tend to serve as
targets for the rest of us, and for that reason alone you all deserve
thanks!

Flavius Vedius Germanicus, as founder of our nation, you haves much
to reflect on with satisfaction. Your devotion to your familia will
doubless be much easier knowing that Nova Roma has strong leadership
to carry on your vision -- one of the surest signs of any successful
venture!

Again, plurimas gratias for all you have done.

---
cura ut valeas,
@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| www.villaivlilla.com
@____@ Daily Life in Ancient Rome
|||| Curatrix Araneae
America Boreoccidentalis
http://ambor.fws1.com
Rogatrix, MMDCCLV

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] archives
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:04:10 -0500

Salve,

>Atticus at esteves@-------- wrote:
>
> Thanks. In fact I had already tried doing this, but there are no links on the
> table with the months. I tried also signing in, but it didn't work either.
> Perhaps our Curatrix could help.

That is odd... You could always go to the messages link and scroll back
through the archives manually my clicking on previous. Or even a faster
method of viewing the archives manualy would be to change the URL.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/novaroma/messages/28780

By lowering the number at the end of the URL you will move back through the
archives. Although, thats a huge pain... I hope the Curatrix can sort this
out for you.

Vale,

"Quamquam cupido sit delictum ab suis crebro est mater virtutum"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Aedile Curule Elect
Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
Canada Orientalis Provincia

Canada Orientalis Website:
www25.brinkster.com/canorien/

Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
--

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Reflections on my term as Consul
From:	Amulius Claudius Petrus <pkkt@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:14:37 -0500

Salve Consul Flavius Vedius,

>Flavius Vedius Germanicus at germanicus@-------- wrote:
>
> With that, I find myself both profoundly tired and drawn to my family and
> other non-NR facets of my life, and am retiring to private life. I am both
> pleased and honored to retain my seat in the Senate, and will as time and
> inclination allows offer such comments and wisdom as I may on the business
> that finds itself before that August Body. You may not see me here or in the
> other everyday fora, but rest assured I will keep an ear to the ground.

Flavius Vedius you are a great citizen, and a role model of Nova Roma
political achievement. I cannot thank you enough for what you have done,
from founding this nation, to guiding it on the right path through
volunteering your time. I continue to wish you the best, and look forward to
seeing you around when you can find the time.

Vale,

"Quamquam cupido sit delictum ab suis crebro est mater virtutum"
"Though ambition may be a fault in itself it is often the mother of virtues"

--
Amulius Claudius Petrus
Aedile Curule Elect
Provincia Legatus Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Canada Orientalis
Retarius Officium Gens Claudia
Canada Orientalis Provincia

Canada Orientalis Website:
www25.brinkster.com/canorien/

Gens Claudia Website:
www.freehost.nu/members/gensclaudia/
--

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] On Precedents as a menace
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@-------->
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:38:30 +0000 (GMT)

Salvete Quirites; et salve, Quinte Fabi Maxime.

--- QFabiusMaxmi@-------- wrote:
> Salvete
> What does history tell us? Romans are comforted by tradition. We
> certainly
> see this throughout Roman history. In fact Romans will only break
> tradition,
> if their existence is thought to be at stake. Hence the Scipionic
> reforms,
> the neuvo homo Marian changes, Sullan counterchanges, etc. People
> saw
> Augustus as a savior. He halted the civil wars allowed Rome to get
> back to
> normal. How? By embracing tradition.

I think it is time for us to stop this discourse of "Romans were the
most traditionalist people on Earth ever". It simply is *not* true.
Romans were *great* innovators. They created a new military system.
They created a new form of government. They created a new engineering
process. They defined new concepts in hardly every aspect of art and
culture.

In fact, the Romans were successful *because* they were great
innovators. And when the Empire became a stagnant, fixed society, Rome
decayed and fell. So let's forget about Romans being staunched
conservatives.

And no; Augustus did *not* embraced tradition. He destroyed the
Republican system.

> > My point is: do precedents have the power of law in NR? That is,
> are they
> > able to impose duties (or even grant rights) over the cives?
>
> QFM: I do not believe they have any binding power, until the
> magistrate
> codifies them by
> turning them into edicta or leges.
> I see them as guideposts if you will, ones that allows a magistrate
> the
> comfort of continuity, if he so desires. They also give the citizens
> an
> understanding of what might occur if the precedent was to be upheld.
>
> A good case in point here was the "Gender Edictum" of last year.
> It makes a good test case (as my old law Prof would say).
> Here we had 4 censors who had followed an existing idea, even though
> it was
> spoken
> not written down. So let's call this an oral tradition. Along comes
> the
> fifth censor who is confronted by this "oral tradition." His
> imperium offers
> him choices.
> a.) Uphold the "oral tradition," b.) Ignore it, and start a new oral
> tradition. c.) Ignore it and issue an edictum changing tradition.
> d.)
> Uphold it and codify the tradition.
>
> Our Censor picked d. Which started quite an uproar here in NR. Why?
> Not
> because it told the people that any tradition has power to become
> law. It
> was that this was considered by many to be a "bad" tradition, one
> that needed
> changing. And now that it was law it would be that much harder
> change.

Now I have to completely agree with Fabius Maximus, and to commend him
on his rather good explanation.

This is how the Roman system of precedents worked. And, in my opinion,
this should be how Nova Roma should work as well.

Thank you, Fabi.

> >
> > The danger behind the precedents is the continuity of things. Let's
> face
> > the fact that some of our Magistrates are somewhat conservatives.
> The only
> > hope of the progressivists lies on voting. Well, if the
> progressivists we
> > vote for are also tied up with the precedents, how are we supposed
> to
> > change things?
>
> Well, since we have shown that magistrates can change things, what is
> the
> problem?
> Our nameless censor did not have to codify the tradition that his
> imperium
> allowed him.
> He could have easily ignored the whole thing.

Exactly.

> > Of course a magistrate can orient his judgments by the precedents,
> but he
> > should not feel compelled to do so.
>
> And nowhere in the Vedian constitution does it say he must.

Never been more correct, Fabi :-).

> However, potential "progressive" magistrates should realize that the
> Roman annual leges on offices makes it very hard to initiate sweeping
> changes.

This should make it difficult for potential "reactionary" magistrates
to destroy those reforms once they have been settled, then :-).

> This is a reflection on the conservative nature of Romans, their fear
> of tyranny and their comfort in tradition.

As for this statement, read the first paragraph.

=====
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
Lictor Curiatus.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com