Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Impressed? Not in the Least !!!
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 20:34:06 EDT

>From F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to C. Municius Scaevola & other citizens
of NR. Salvete.

NR is based on the human condition and, as such, represents a cross section
of the citizens of the world rather than just a single cultural or interested
point of view. For someone who is primarily interested in military or
culinary pursuits, many of the threads seem pointless, political,
impractical, and unpleasant but not so for those involved in those threads.
I am sure that many Romans in Antiquity found the political fencing and
bickering of their fellow citizens to be so much humbug. I will be the first
to admit that we have a few out-and-out lunatics, overbearing Conscript
Fathers, and overly-wordy plebians (se moi?) on this list. I do not agree
with everything that is said and I attempt to avoid those threads that do not
interest me. Try opening a discussion on a subject that is near and dear to
you so that we can experience more diversity from our citizens. I look
forward to seeing all of you add to the culture and experience of Nova Roma
in the future. May the Gods grant you good fortune.

Valete.

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"rexmarciusnr" <RexMarcius@aol.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 01:38:38 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...> wrote:
> Ave Marcus Marcius,
>
> Just to inform you, when you resigned your citizenship and were
gone from Nova Roma the People of Nova Roma voted to eliminate the
Curator Sermo position. The Praetors have taken up those
responsibilities and duties. The law that was promulgated was: Lex
Octavia de Sermone and can be found here:
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2002-06-05-i.html.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Salve Consul!

You are indeed right about this, it slipped my mind. May I suggest to
put a sign "rescinded" after the relevant section in the Lex Vedia
Vigintisexviri.

Ave et Vale

Marcus Marcius Rex


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"rexmarciusnr" <RexMarcius@aol.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 02:10:50 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "pompeia_cornelia" <scriba_forum@h...> wrote:
> P. Cornelia Strabo Praetor Marco Marcio Rex et Populesque:
>
> Surprise surprise!
>
> I am sorry that these 'infactions' of your desired freedoms are
> distasteful to you.
>

Ooooppps, calm down valued Praetrix! What I wished for mainly was
clarification! I do have my convictions, but nothing in our social
contract (as expressed in the Constitution) goes so much to the heart
of our society as the freedom of speech. After all we mainly exist in
communication!

> That this plunges
> you into such despair and frustration is indeed dismaying.
>
> You have circumferenced this issue quite widely, and you have
> included pornography...ahh, ok...
>
> In your quest to talk about pornography on the list, or to lump
> pornographers (those who watch too?) in with felons and child
> molesters is legally incongruent. It has a very loose association
> with the moderator's warning I produced.

Again valued Praetrix, calm down, these were hypothetical
illustrations of those topics that I first remembered from American
free speech and right to Privacy discussions. The dispute about
pornography and free speech was portrayed in the Larry Flint movie
(it is btw highly illegal in some countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran
etc. THANKFULLY not in the West). Publication of felony convictions
have led to lynch mobs when child molesters were involved. To be a
member of a fascist party makes you a criminal in my country, whereas
it is part of free speech in the US.

I think these are good examples to triangulate NR position on free
speech. I know you can come up with other, better ones.

>
> And what does SIC!!! mean?

As another courteous citizen has pointed out already it means
simply "so" in Latin and is used to point out that something was
indeed written as quoted, not necessarily only to point out
misspellings.

Ave et Vale

Marcus Marcius Rex


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: SIC People
From:	"rexmarciusnr" <RexMarcius@aol.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 02:14:33 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "gcassiusnerva" <gcassiusnerva@c...> wrote:
SNIP

> I, therefore, also made a decision to leave this Community and to
> share my Romanitas only with those people I could really associate
> myself with. I mean I could live with an Octavius, a Cassius and
> certainly with a Minucius Audens but I can only leave with a
> Germanicus, a Fabulus {SIC} Maximus and a Pornelius {SIC} Sulla.
>
> So by this notice I formally resign and depose myself
> from the citizenship of Nova Roma"
>
> Gaius Cassius Nerva

Salve Gaie!

Thank you for reminding me of this. I believe I have expressed my
regret for a few letters in my resignation (those that you thankfully
highlighted), in the Senate once, but I have not done so on the
mainlist. I believe it is time to do so now.

Ave et Vale

Marcus Marcius Rex


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Roman Music
From:	"Lucius Equitius" <vergil@starpower.net>
Date:	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 23:07:06 -0400

Salvete,

I received my copy of "Somnia Imperii" by David Marshall on Friday.
http://www.ancestral.co.uk/romanmusic.htm

I made the order on Sept 23 and paid through "Pay Pal", so the package only took a few days to arrive from England. I paid $27 including shipping.

Although the music seems overly 'middle eastern' influenced I'm very pleased with the deal.

Valete, Lucius Equitius

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 23:31:34 EDT

Salvete.

We have several layers of interest here. The first question is how
widespread was freedom of speech in the Republic?
We do know from the annalists that the Senate could modify all freedoms to
the citizens after disasters, presumably an action to restore discipline to a
citizen militia that was disillusioned by defeat. We also know that women
could be limited by lex to reduce mourning, change what finery they wore, and
demand that they make sacrifices to the Republic such as what happened after
Cannae.
We also know that under the principate there was no true freedom of speech.
Citizens' acts including speech were open to the reigning's emperor's
interpetation. Many a citizen ended up in the mammertine because they went
beyond the emperors boundries, knownly or unknownly.

Here in Nova Roma I have always assumed that a citizen's macro duties do not
impact on those of Nova Roma, as long as he is a good citizen.
So what makes a good citizen? The College would say one who loves and honors
the gods, the politicians would say one who maintains his oath, the average
citizen would say, one that makes Nova Roma a nice place to exist.
To be short there are many interpetations. Just like what our idea of
freedom of speech is.
Instead of putting that interpetation in the hands of the Senate, we have put
it in the hands of the Praetors.
So, we say what we like, but if we overstep our bounds, the Praetors will
tell us. However, I have to say when I was put on moderation several months
ago, for overstepping the bounds, I much preferred that result to going to
the Mammertine.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 5 Oct 2002 20:41:32 -0700 (PDT)

--- rexmarciusnr <RexMarcius@aol.com> wrote:
> --- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus"
> <lsicinius@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > US Lible laws are fairly strict. In most US States
> the
> > plantif has to prove that the statement was made
> with
> > "reckless disregard" for the truth and that it was
> > intended to defame. That is a tough standard.
> However
> > we would have to retain a lawyer to defend us, and
> the
> > cost of defending ourselves far excedes the funds
> in
> > the treasury. If we couldn't find a lawyer who
> would
> > accept the case pro bono I'm afraid we would
> likely
> > lose a case that had little merit. The small size
> of
> > our treasury does have one advantage however. It
> means
> > that in most cases Nova Roma isn't worth the
> effort of
> > suing. This wouldn't protect us from a case where
> the
> > plantif was determined to sue even if it cost him
> more
> > money than he could ever hope to recover.
> >
> >
> > =====
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
>
> Salve Druse!
>
> So what you are saying is that anything even
> remotely resembling a
> defamation on the mainlist - no matter how truthful
> it may be - is
> actually an "imminent and clear danger to the
> Republic" due to the
> threat of litigation? That is a valid argument and
> if it is indeed
> likely to happen, I rest my case (and we might as
> well close shop all
> together).
>
> From your description it seems that it does not
> really matter what
> the claims against Nova Roma are or how trumped up
> they may be:
> because of our lack of funds we would go under
> anyway. Is there
> really no legal (US) way we can ensure that all
> those using the
> mainlist release Nova Roma (the corporation) from
> any future claims
> they might have against her resulting from mainlist
> communications?
>
> Maybe something over the entrance reading:
>
> "abandon hope all who enter here"
>
> (note: I cannot really claim copyright for this one
> ;-) )
>
> Ave et vale
>
> Marcus Marcius Rex
>
There are two cases where a US ISP was sued over
content of news groups. In one case the ISP won
because they acted as a common carrier, and exercised
no control over the content of the postings. In the
other case the ISP lost becaused they had exercised
editorial control over postings and failed to remove
the "offensive" post. If our mainlist was unmodarated
and had never been modarated we would be in the same
postion as the ISP that won thier case. Since we have
a modarated list the precedent is Nova Roma can be
sued for the content that is posted on this list. In
the UK the situation is even worse. Demon internet
lost a case because they mirrored a US based thai
language newsgroup where a UK subject was slandered.
The UK courts don't even accept the "acted as a common
carrier" defense.

Yahoo has protected themselves from US lawsuits by
leaving editorial control of these groups up to the
owner of the group. For now Nova Roma has the
"protection" of not being worth the effort of suing.
Someone would have to be willing to spend thousands of
Dollars in legal fees with no hope of gaining anything
other than the meager contents of our treasury, the
rights to the the Nova Roma domain and trademarked
SPQR in a wreath logo. This effort would require a
great deal of malice towards Nova Roma. The
Resignations of some former citizens show that there
are some people who harbor enough resentment against
Nova Roma to consider this kind of action.

Often the former citizens dislike of Nova Roma is
matched by current citizens dislike of those who have
resigned. This is where we are most likely to see
legal action. A Current citizen makes a post accusing
a former citizen of something. The person with a
grudge against Nova Roma then uses the post as a means
of revenge.

I Don't care for the idea of a ban on discussing the
activites of former citizens, but it is an area where
a clear danger to the Republic exists, and would have
to support it until the US and other Macronations get
rid of stupid laws that would allow someone to sue
Nova Roma rather than the person making the slanderous
post.

We also might want to consider a Nova Roman Lex
setting up civil procedures for Libel so that a
citizen who feels he has been defamed on a Nova Roman
list can seek recourse in a Nova Roman venue rather
than having to resort to Macro National courts.

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
(A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.)
Seneca, Letters to Lucilius

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Music
From:	Charlie Collins <cotta@spamcop.net>
Date:	Sat, 05 Oct 2002 23:12:40 -0500

Ave Lucius Equitius,
I too ordered the album and also noted the "middle
eastern" overtone. But, I really like the music although
I would like to see another album come out with a more
martial/military theme. Still I would highly recommend
this album for anybody.

Vale,
Sextus Cornelius Cotta


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 05:26:01 -0000

Salve Pompeia,

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "pompeia_cornelia" <scriba_forum@h...> wrote:
> P. Cornelia Strabo Praetor Marco Marcio Rex et Populesque:

> And what does SIC!!! mean?

SIC means: Thus; so. Used to indicate that a quoted passage,
especially one containing an error or unconventional spelling, has
been retained in its original form or written intentionally. From
Latin meaning "see"

Source: The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition
Copyright � 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 05:51:24 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "rexmarciusnr" <RexMarcius@a...> wrote:
> Salve Quinte Cassi!
>
> But would you not agree, my right honorable amice, that someone who
> is intent on bankrupting Nova Roma and to drive it out of existence
> would do so anyway and whether we exercise our free speech rights
or
> not?
>
> If we overly restrict ourselves because of this theoretical threat
we
> will have given in to blackmail before it even occured. Not very
> Roman to my mind!
>
> Ave et Vale
>
> Marcus Marcius Rex

Salve,

If one were intent on the destruction of Nova Roma it would be
attempted regardless of what you, I, or other citizens do. However,
if someone were intent on breaking into my abode and stealing my
valuable collection of Red Rose Tea figurines I would be a damn fool
to hand him a gun and ammo would I not?

Freedom of Speech does not give one the freedom to libel, slander,
defamation of character, sexually harrass, verbally threaten another
persons well being, incite a riot, and a whole host of other
activities that threaten the well being of a person or persons.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech
From:	"M. Flavius Aurelius" <marcus.flavius@bigpond.com>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:05:43 +1000

Reading the debate about potential libel suits ruining Nova Roma etc, it
occurred to me that Nova Roma does not have any libel laws, and so it would
be impossible to sue anyone or the Republic for such "offence".

Marcus Flavius Aurelius
Durovernium, Australia Orientalis Superior
marcus.flavius@bigpond.com
ICQ: 4895187

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Music
From:	"scott dolleck" <billgatesson@hotmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 05 Oct 2002 21:44:42 -0600

Salvete,

I also ordered the CD.
It's pretty good, the talking dosen't really work but the music
is great.very fast shipping!!!

Valete,
Lucius Avisius Seneca

>From: "Lucius Equitius" <vergil@starpower.net>
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: [Nova-Roma] Roman Music
>Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 23:07:06 -0400
>
>Salvete,
>
>I received my copy of "Somnia Imperii" by David Marshall on Friday.
>http://www.ancestral.co.uk/romanmusic.htm
>
>I made the order on Sept 23 and paid through "Pay Pal", so the package only
>took a few days to arrive from England. I paid $27 including shipping.
>
>Although the music seems overly 'middle eastern' influenced I'm very
>pleased with the deal.
>
>Valete, Lucius Equitius
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech
From:	Kristoffer From <from@darkeye.net>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 13:54:08 +0200

"M. Flavius Aurelius" wrote:
> Reading the debate about potential libel suits ruining Nova Roma etc, it
> occurred to me that Nova Roma does not have any libel laws, and so it would
> be impossible to sue anyone or the Republic for such "offence".

Salve, Marce Flavi Aureli.

Unfortunately, we're registered as a non-profit organisation in the
United States, and hence subject to their rather lawsuit-friendly legal
system. (No US-bashing, just US-legal-system-bashing. :) )

Perhaps we should relocate the actual organisation/corporation to
another country, where we wouldn't perpetually have to worry about
macronational legislation destroying all our efforts thus far. I'd
suggest Sweden, as we'd be perfectly safe here. Trust me on this one.
(Yes, swedish-anti-bashing. Hah! :) )

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Edictum Propraetoricium LXII about the appointment of four
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <christer.edling@telia.com>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 14:03:30 +0200

Ex Officio Propraetoris Thules

Edictum Propraetoricium LXII about the appointment of four Scribae
Primi in the Academia

As the Academia is growing it need to strengthen its adminstration
according to the Edictum Propraetoricium LXI about the Administratio
Mediorum Academiae Thules (AMAT) (Central Aministration of Academia
Thules). It is a great pleasure for me, Caeso Fabius Quintilianus, to
appoint these good citizens to these important positions within
Provincia Thule and the Cohors Propraetoris (The Propraetorian Staff,
Provincial Government)!

I, as a Nova Roman citizen within the Provincia Thule, am proud to
see the Gravitas and Pietas these citizens shows and I am very glad
that they has accepted these very important positions as Scribae !

I. I hereby appoint Honorable Manius Constantinus Serapio as Scriba
Translationem Primus Academiae Thules (First Scribe for translations).

II. I hereby appoint Illustrus Sextus Apollonius Scipio as Scriba
Fiscalis Primus Academiae Thules (First Scribe for Finances).

III. I hereby appoint Illustrus Sextus Apollonius Scipio as Scriba
Explorator Primus Academiae Thules (First Scribe for Research)

IV. I hereby appoint Illustrus Titus Labienus Fortunatus as Scriba
Archivi Secundus Academiae Thules (Second Scribe for Records and
Archives)

V. Above appointed officials are asked to observe that they are bound
by the "Approved Regula (Charter) for the Administration of Thule" as
it was published on the 15th of April 2001.

VI. As officials of Provincia Thule they are asked to, within on week
of their appointment, swear the public oath shown on
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/lex99191002.html using both their
Nova Roman name and within parenthesis their macro-national (real)
name.

The Oath must be published on the NovaRomaThule List and the Nova
Roma Main List!

VII. This edictum becomes effective immediately.

Given October the 6th, in the year of the consulship of Marcus
Octavius Germanicus and Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix 2755 AUC.

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Propraetor Thules
--
--
Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senator et Senior Curule Aedile
Propraetor Thules
AUCTOR LEGIONIS, Legio VII "Res Publica"
Sodalitas Egressus Praefectus Provincia Thules
"Fautor Societatis Iuventutis Romanae"
************************************************
The homepage of Senior Curule Aedile
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus and his Cohors Aedilis
http://italia.novaroma.org/cohorsaedilis/
************************************************
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"
************************************************
Dignitas, Justica, Fidelitas and Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] On the question of personal accusation
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Johnston?= <jamiekjohnston@yahoo.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 13:15:30 +0100 (BST)

me-in-@disguise.co.uk wrote:

> I think their view would be much more relatavistic than ours, almost hypocritical in > that who was involved mattered far more than what. The situation probably applies > in any slave society. It's unlikely they would have given a hoot about buying slaves > for any sadistic purpose or dropping round to a brothel of children of either sex: > neither involved citizens. On the other hand, adultery or fighting your father would > probably have your name in the mud for life.
> Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

Many thanks for your feedback, Caesariensis.

True enough, but it seems to me that this is not so much because the principle of private immorality = public disgrace was applied unevenly as because traditional Roman ethics would have held adultery and parricide as more wicked than mistreating (as we would see it) slaves. So it's not that Censors would consider offences against slaves equally immoral to offences against citizens but would turn a blind eye, but more that they would not consider offences against slaves sufficiently immoral to warrant their investigation. I hope I've made clear the distinction I have in mind.

I am aware that some schools of philosophy which could have been heard in learned Roman circles did not hold with this socially relativist approach to ethics, but so far as I know these didn't make a significant dent in traditional Roman values during the republican period. This is not my area of expertise, however, and I should be pleased to be corrected.

Jamie

www.strategikon.org

---------------------------------
Get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs.

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"Proculus Postumius Nero" <postumius@gmx.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:56:09 -0400

Pro. Postumius Nero Quiritibus S.P.D.

Salvete,

The good Proconsular Senator Maximus has brought up a good point. The extent
of freedom of speech is open to interpretation by the citizens, who have
placed it in the judgement of the Praetors to interpret, due to the mere
fact that were we all to decide what is and is not part of freedom of
speech, it would be almost impossible to come to a compromised answer. The
Praetor Strabo has made it clear, in my opinion, as to what she feels
violates the freedom of speech. I would, seperate from the opinion of said
Praetor, state my personal opinion to be more captivated in the saying,
"Your rights end where another's begin." I feel that some topics of
discussion are, at their core, covered by freedom of speech, but, moving to
the further parts of it, can violate someone else's rights as well. So the
dilemma is, quite honestly, how do we censor ourselves so that we do not
violate someone's rights, while exercising our own, when the two meet
unpleasantly? There could be only one moral solution to this, again in my
personal and not professional opinion, that being simply not to say what
violates others' rights. Honestly, great citizens, if it's going to violate
another's rights, does it really need to be said. My answer: No.

Optime Vale in Pace Deorum,

Proculus Postumius Nero Drusus Sepulchratus,
Scriba, Retiarius, et Iurisconsultus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Roman Music
From:	"Marcus Cassius Julianus" <cassius622@aol.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 13:01:31 -0000

Salvete,

The "Middle Eastern" theme to some of the music is actually quite
historical for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the CD tries to include
music from various areas of the Empire - which would have included
the provinces of Africa, Syria, etc. Secondly, The earliest known
Medieval music is oddly reminicent of such oriental tones - which may
well have crept into a lot of Roman music early on by way of Greece.

Not to mention that many of the instruments are the same - flutes,
finger cymbals, drums struck by hand...

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "Lucius Equitius" <vergil@s...> wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> I received my copy of "Somnia Imperii" by David Marshall on Friday.
> http://www.ancestral.co.uk/romanmusic.htm
>
> I made the order on Sept 23 and paid through "Pay Pal", so the
package only took a few days to arrive from England. I paid $27
including shipping.
>
> Although the music seems overly 'middle eastern' influenced I'm
very pleased with the deal.
>
> Valete, Lucius Equitius
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel
From:	cassius622@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 09:27:04 EDT

Salvete,

After seeing all the opinions about libel posted to the list, I went on a
search and found the following two sites:

http://dmoz.org/Society/Law/Legal_Information/Defamation/Internet/

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilreis/defamation-in-cyberspace.html

Apparently folks *are* suing each other for things said on Internet lists. I
am unsure that Nova Roma itself is liable for every word spoken by every
person subscribed to the list... but certainly each individual seems to be
liable for their own words.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 07:37:25 -0700

Avete Omnes,

That wont resolve anything. If I filed a lawsuit against Audens and NR for the libelous statement, which could have been done then Nova Roma's atty and Audens would have had to come down to California to answer those charges here in California. This is not uncommon. Under the fair debt collection practices act there is a section that describes when telephone contact may take place, it is specific that it spells out the hours (8 am-9pm) and that that is based on the customer's location (not the collectors). So if a collector in NY called CA at 8 am NY time, that would be in violation of that federal law and that CA debtor would end up suing and filing the lawsuit in CA.

Look, instead of trying to think about relocating our incorporation, why dont we attempt to NOT create the problem in the first place. An ounce of prevention, you know?

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Kristoffer From
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 4:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech

"M. Flavius Aurelius" wrote:
> Reading the debate about potential libel suits ruining Nova Roma etc, it
> occurred to me that Nova Roma does not have any libel laws, and so it would
> be impossible to sue anyone or the Republic for such "offence".

Salve, Marce Flavi Aureli.

Unfortunately, we're registered as a non-profit organisation in the
United States, and hence subject to their rather lawsuit-friendly legal
system. (No US-bashing, just US-legal-system-bashing. :) )

Perhaps we should relocate the actual organisation/corporation to
another country, where we wouldn't perpetually have to worry about
macronational legislation destroying all our efforts thus far. I'd
suggest Sweden, as we'd be perfectly safe here. Trust me on this one.
(Yes, swedish-anti-bashing. Hah! :) )

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 07:37:40 -0700

Ave,

According to my attorny, NR could be sued along with the person who made the libelous statement.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: cassius622@aol.com
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 6:27 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel

Salvete,

After seeing all the opinions about libel posted to the list, I went on a
search and found the following two sites:

http://dmoz.org/Society/Law/Legal_Information/Defamation/Internet/

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilreis/defamation-in-cyberspace.html

Apparently folks *are* suing each other for things said on Internet lists. I
am unsure that Nova Roma itself is liable for every word spoken by every
person subscribed to the list... but certainly each individual seems to be
liable for their own words.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 09:49:04 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Consul,

> According to my attorny, NR could be sued along with the person
> who made the libelous statement.

Do you intend to do so?

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus
Consul of Nova Roma, MMDCCLV a.u.c.
Curator Araneum et Senator


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 07:49:29 -0700

No.

Why?

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Marcus Octavius Germanicus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel

Salve Consul,

> According to my attorny, NR could be sued along with the person
> who made the libelous statement.

Do you intend to do so?

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus
Consul of Nova Roma, MMDCCLV a.u.c.
Curator Araneum et Senator

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech
From:	Kristoffer From <from@darkeye.net>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 17:03:32 +0200

"L. Cornelius Sulla" wrote:
> That wont resolve anything. If I filed a lawsuit against
> Audens and NR for the libelous statement, which could have
> been done then Nova Roma's atty and Audens would have had
> to come down to California to answer those charges here in
> California. This is not uncommon. Under the fair debt
> collection practices act there is a section that describes
> when telephone contact may take place, it is specific that
> it spells out the hours (8 am-9pm) and that that is based on
> the customer's location (not the collectors). So if a
> collector in NY called CA at 8 am NY time, that would be in
> violation of that federal law and that CA debtor would end
> up suing and filing the lawsuit in CA.

Salve, Luci Corneli Sulla.

That federal law wouldn't hold any power over a swedish organisation.
There's a difference between moving to another state and moving to
another macronation.

And for the preventative approach...what one person's cultural heritage
may deem not only acceptable but maybe even good-natured could
conceivably be found slanderous (or whatever) in a US court. You can
only hope nobody ever wants to sue, and if I've understood the situation
it's not whether or not we're found guilty, it'll ruin us if we get sued
at all.

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:04:52 -0500 (CDT)

Salve Consul,

> No.

Thank you, I am happy to hear it.

> Why?

You referred to "my attorney"; that's a phrase that always raises
such concerns.

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus
Consul of Nova Roma, MMDCCLV a.u.c.
Curator Araneum et Senator


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Two articles about Cyber Libel
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:02:21 -0700 (PDT)

--- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> Ave,
>
> According to my attorny, NR could be sued along with
> the person who made the libelous statement.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

I Looked into this when I was considering setting up a
website with comments. Once you exercise any editorial
control over the contents, you assume liability for
the contents. The day Nova Roma apointed it's first
list modarator it assumed legal responsibility for
libelous statements that the modarator allowed to be
posted.

There is also a case in the courts right now involving
the ISP Verizon and the RIAA over the DMCA that
involves publishing copyrighted material (File Sharing
Music). The DCMA gives copyright holders supeona
powers WITHOUT going to the courts. If this section of
the act is found Constionual, Nova Roma will have to
give all contact information about a citizen to any
copyright holder that demands it.

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
(A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.)
Seneca, Letters to Lucilius

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:08:46 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: Kristoffer From
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech

"L. Cornelius Sulla" wrote:
> That wont resolve anything. If I filed a lawsuit against
> Audens and NR for the libelous statement, which could have
> been done then Nova Roma's atty and Audens would have had
> to come down to California to answer those charges here in
> California. This is not uncommon. Under the fair debt
> collection practices act there is a section that describes
> when telephone contact may take place, it is specific that
> it spells out the hours (8 am-9pm) and that that is based on
> the customer's location (not the collectors). So if a
> collector in NY called CA at 8 am NY time, that would be in
> violation of that federal law and that CA debtor would end
> up suing and filing the lawsuit in CA.

Salve, Luci Corneli Sulla.

Ave,
That federal law wouldn't hold any power over a swedish organisation.
There's a difference between moving to another state and moving to
another macronation.

That is not exactly the case. I will have to contact my attorney about it, and research this for my own interest. However, if there are any assets of the corporation in the US they could be frozen; liens could be filed against the corporation and those members of the Board of Directors (most likely), claims filed with the insurance company that issues Board of Director's insurance (if there is any) and I am certain that if there are relationships between those countries that would also play a factor.

And for the preventative approach...what one person's cultural heritage
may deem not only acceptable but maybe even good-natured could
conceivably be found slanderous (or whatever) in a US court. You can
only hope nobody ever wants to sue, and if I've understood the situation
it's not whether or not we're found guilty, it'll ruin us if we get sued
at all.

This is why each of us should consider the words we use. And how we are using them. The ultimate defense to libel and slander lawsuits is that the words stated must be true. If we cannot know that we are stating the absolute truth, dont say it. :)

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:24:11 -0700 (PDT)

--- Proculus Postumius Nero <postumius@gmx.net> wrote:
> Pro. Postumius Nero Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> Salvete,
>
> The good Proconsular Senator Maximus has brought up
> a good point. The extent
> of freedom of speech is open to interpretation by
> the citizens, who have
> placed it in the judgement of the Praetors to
> interpret, due to the mere
> fact that were we all to decide what is and is not
> part of freedom of
> speech, it would be almost impossible to come to a
> compromised answer. The
> Praetor Strabo has made it clear, in my opinion, as
> to what she feels
> violates the freedom of speech. I would, seperate
> from the opinion of said
> Praetor, state my personal opinion to be more
> captivated in the saying,
> "Your rights end where another's begin." I feel that
> some topics of
> discussion are, at their core, covered by freedom of
> speech, but, moving to
> the further parts of it, can violate someone else's
> rights as well. So the
> dilemma is, quite honestly, how do we censor
> ourselves so that we do not
> violate someone's rights, while exercising our own,
> when the two meet
> unpleasantly? There could be only one moral solution
> to this, again in my
> personal and not professional opinion, that being
> simply not to say what
> violates others' rights. Honestly, great citizens,
> if it's going to violate
> another's rights, does it really need to be said. My
> answer: No.
>
> Optime Vale in Pace Deorum,
>
> Proculus Postumius Nero Drusus Sepulchratus,
> Scriba, Retiarius, et Iurisconsultus
>

Salve,
There are some safegaurds against a decession by a
Praetor on freedom of speach. The other Praetor has
the power to Veto a decession by a Praetor, and both
Consuls have the power to Veto a decession by a
Praetor. The Tribunes also have the power to decide if
the actions of a Praetor meets the Constion's
definitions of freedom of speech.

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
(A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.)
Seneca, Letters to Lucilius

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Freedom of Speech
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:43:16 -0700 (PDT)

Salve Qurites,

This thread has gotten into the area of Libel, but we
can't forget my original point about efforts to remove
political speech from the mainlist.

Of all the forms of speech none is as important as
political speech if we wish to maintain a free nation.
This is the first area of speech that dictatorships
crack down on. Political speach is what would have
gotten you sent to the Gulag or to a Concetration camp
under the Soviet and Nazi states. It is what will get
you sent to a reeducation camp in the People's
Republic of China.

The Nazi, Soviet and Chinese governments cared little
if citizens talked about food, dead languages, or
dress, as long as there was no political content
involved. These are the kinds of topics that some
citizens wish to limit this list to.

Free political Speach is vital to maintaining a free
nation, yet that is the one area of speach that is
attacked from time to time by some misguided citizens
who don't care take part in the debates. Banning posts
that are apolitical but offtopic or tasteless does
little harm to the political process (Other than
creating a precedent of censorship) but any attempt to
ban or limit political speach is a danger to this or
any other Republic.

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
(A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.)
Seneca, Letters to Lucilius

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech/Slander & Libel
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 11:56:24 EDT

>From F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to concerned citizens of Nova Roma.
Salvete.

According to the Americans Andrew Jackson, Sam Houston, and Samuel Clemens,
most crimes should be handled by the legal system of police, marshals, and
the courts. The exception to that are slander and libel which the notable
gentlemen listed above said should be handled personally. It does not
behoove the citizens of our fair micronation to roll in the muddy waters of
"who said what to whom about what." If two citizens have a disagreement of a
question of slander and/or libel let them take it off the list and have a
little dance betwist themselves. Nothing like a little face-to-face
discussion to clear up these matters. If geography is a problem, they could
always settle the matter with gladiators or charioteers. Remember, good
citizens, it may not be what was said or how it was said but how it was
interpreted that makes for "fightin words." May the Gods grant all good
fortune.

Valete.

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] On the question of personal accusation
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 22:23:16 +0100 (BST)

-----Original Message-----
>From : =?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Johnston?= >
>So it's not that Censors would consider offences against slaves equally immoral to offences against citizens but would turn a blind eye, but more that they would not consider offences against slaves sufficiently immoral to warrant their investigation. I hope I've made clear the distinction I have in mind.
>
Yes, I accept that. Possibly one of the reasons for Christianity's attraction was that it regarded all people alike. It's hard to understand the instant change of status when a slave is freed or an individual enslaved. The nearest to it would seem to be the Japanese attitude in WW2 to individuals prepared to dishonour themselves by captivity instead of suicide: if they held themselves so cheap, why should their captors respect them? Of course some very obvious questions are begged there but it suited nobody to address them.
There's a practical blindness I often detect in some modern extremist views too, an inability to project that if they behave like that where it's acceptable, they probably will where it's not regardless of laws.
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

--
Personalised email by http://another.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"radams36" <radams36@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 21:35:11 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "rexmarciusnr" <RexMarcius@a...> wrote:
> --- In Nova-Roma@y..., "pompeia_cornelia" <scriba_forum@h...> wrote:
> > P. Cornelia Strabo Praetor Marco Marcio Rex et Populesque:
> >
> > Surprise surprise!
> >
> > I am sorry that these 'infactions' of your desired freedoms are
> > distasteful to you.
> >
>
> Ooooppps, calm down valued Praetrix! What I wished for mainly was
> clarification! I do have my convictions, but nothing in our social
> contract (as expressed in the Constitution) goes so much to the
heart
> of our society as the freedom of speech. After all we mainly exist
in
> communication!

I echo the sentiment that the Praetrix should "calm down". I found
the reply to the original post extremely intemperate, and without
justification. The questions raised were valid and stated reasonably.
Regrettably, the same could not be said of the tone of the reply.

>
> > That this plunges
> > you into such despair and frustration is indeed dismaying.
> >
> > You have circumferenced this issue quite widely, and you have
> > included pornography...ahh, ok...
> >
> > In your quest to talk about pornography on the list, or to lump
> > pornographers (those who watch too?) in with felons and child
> > molesters is legally incongruent. It has a very loose association
> > with the moderator's warning I produced.
>
> Again valued Praetrix, calm down, these were hypothetical
> illustrations of those topics that I first remembered from American
> free speech and right to Privacy discussions. <SNIP>
> I think these are good examples to triangulate NR position on free
> speech. I know you can come up with other, better ones.
>
Again, I agree. To bring up the topic of pornography as a
hypothetical in this context was perfectly valid. To leap from this
to contending that there is any intent to turn the list into a porno
discussion group is disingenuous, to say the least.
> >
(SNIP)
>
> Marcus Marcius Rex

Freedom of speech is one of the values most precious to most of us in
modern civilization, and is therefore inherently prone to generate
the most passionate discussions imaginable. There is hardly anything
wrong with this, but it points up the even greater need for us all to
strive for dispassionate and reasoned discussion of the topic. The
reactionary, and frankly, strident tone of the reply you received was
unjustified and distasteful, in my opinion, and certainly devoid of
temperance and reason. FWIW.

Vale,

Rufus Iulius Palaeologus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Constitutional freedoms: a suggestion
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Johnston?= <jamiekjohnston@yahoo.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 14:22:29 +0100 (BST)

Proculus Postumius Nero
wrote:

> The extent
> of freedom of speech is open to interpretation by the citizens, who have
> placed it in the judgement of the Praetors to interpret, due to the mere
> fact that were we all to decide what is and is not part of freedom of
> speech, it would be almost impossible to come to a compromised answer.

Nero's comments have reminded me of a customary practice of the ancient Republic which might be of some use in this discussion. As I recall, the two Praetors who remained in Rome every year (the Urban Praetor and the Peregrine (or Aliens') Praetor) used by convention to issue public statements on interpretation of law, by virtue of their civil jurisdiction (the Urban Praetor used to hear civil cases involving citizens, the Peregrine Praetor those involving non-citizens). The practice varied between the two Praetors: The Urban Praetor would conventionally issue at the start of the year an edict outlining his interpretation of the law and the penalties to be imposed on those found guilty. These edicts generally varied little from year to year. The Peregrine Praetor would whenever he chose issue 'formulae', each stating his position on a given legal issue, which would serve as guidelines for judges.

So my suggestion is this: perhaps in cases of uncertainty about the extent of, and the limitations on, citizens' constitutional freedoms, such as the freedom of speech, it would be appropriate for the Praetors to issue either edicts or formulae outlining their general interpretation of the constitution and the laws relevant to the matter, and indicating how they might rule were a case to be brought before them. My suggestion would be for the Praetors to issue formulae rather than edicts, as under the current constitution edicts have legal force, which would perhaps make them too strong for this purpose. If such a practice were to be adopted, we might consider Praetor Stabo's recent comments to constitute a formula.

I hope this is of some help.

Jamie

www.strategikon.org

---------------------------------
Get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs.

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Roman Music
From:	"pjane" <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 22:17:35 -0000

> It's pretty good, the talking dosen't really work but the music
> is great.very fast shipping!!!

I think David Marshall's is the best attempt to date at recreating Roman music,
and I'm so glad that several people in Nova Roma have encouraged the
creators by buying it!

I don't suppose any of you out there is a music scholar? I belong to a
medieval/Renaissance band and I could probably get several people
interested in playing Roman music if we could only get hold of sheet music. I
just don't have enough knowledge to create it myself!

Patricia Cassia


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Freedom of Speech
From:	"pjane" <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 06 Oct 2002 22:20:13 -0000

> Look, instead of trying to think about relocating our incorporation, why dont
we attempt to NOT create the problem in the first place. An ounce of
prevention, you know?
>

An excellent approach, Lucius Cornelius. Have you any ideas on how to
accomplish this? I'm sure a simple change in list policy would be easy
enough to achieve.

Patricia Cassia


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Constitutional freedoms: a suggestion
From:	"Proculus Postumius Nero" <postumius@gmx.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 18:23:29 -0400

Salve Ms. Johnston,

I thank you for your reference to my longwinded statements to the People, of
which I consider you a part. I must say that I could and do agree with your
suggestion, which then makes it more understood to the People exactly what
the Praetors would consider permissible with regards to certain rights and
legislation, should it ever be brought before their courts. I should hope
your posting reaches both the Praetors, as well as those who shall be
campaigning for the Praetorship of next year. I think this will be a tool
both for currently serving and future Praetors, and sets a good example for
others to follow.

Optime Vale in Pace Sui Aeterna,

Pro. Postumius Nero

(Note: I only use the name by which you send your messages above due to the
fact that I, unfortunately, am ignorant of your Roman name, duly noting that
you are not yet a citizen.)


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Ethics of slavery (WAS: On the question of personal accusation)
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Johnston?= <jamiekjohnston@yahoo.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 23:16:18 +0100 (BST)

Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis wrote:

> Yes, I accept that. Possibly one of the reasons for Christianity's attraction was > that it regarded all people alike. It's hard to understand the instant change of > status when a slave is freed or an individual enslaved. The nearest to it would > seem to be the Japanese attitude in WW2 to individuals prepared to dishonour > themselves by captivity instead of suicide: if they held themselves so cheap, why > should their captors respect them? Of course some very obvious questions are > begged there but it suited nobody to address them.

Very true. I think the Graeco-Roman view would have been rather different from the Japanese one, though. Of course no ancient thinker managed to produce a justification of slavery which would satisfy most people today, but we can understand their approaches. It was quite common to see slaves as an altogether different type of creature: one historian writing in Greek (I believe it was Dio) used the word 'genos', mean 'race', in relation to slaves. As you point out, that kind of view makes it hard to cope with the question of what happens in individual cases when people pass into and out of slavery: clearly they don't literally change race, and the racial idea probably wasn't literally believed. But it perhaps explains partly why the Romans were so uncomfortable about freedmen. It took several generations for a family to live down the perceived stigma of descent from a slave.

Philosophers approached the question of what distinguished slaves from other people rather more sensibly, but all the philosophical attempts to deal with it that I know of end with the same general conclusion that there is something inherently different about most slaves which makes them suitable only for slavery, which is therefore okay. Such arguments were, of course, the foundations of arguments used by slave-traders in more recent centuries to justify enslaving Africans, who clearly *were* a different race, thus fitting very nicely into Greek and Roman ideas on the matter.

I may be doing a disservice to ancient philosophy by overlooking any thinkers who did not accept that slavery was justifiable, in which case I should be pleased to hear about it from anyone who hasn't been put off reading this thread by its descent from the freedom of speech / libel thread (I've re-named it in the hope of shaking this hereditary stigma).

Jamie

www.strategikon.org

---------------------------------
Get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs.

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Digest No 190 Roman Music
From:	"Lucius Equitius" <vergil@starpower.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 18:33:12 -0400

Censor Lucius Equituis Cincinnatus Quiritibus SPD

This is great! I have always thought that the Forum was also to be used for
the exchange of information and posting notices. Of course everyone will
have differing opinions on things, especially food or music
'De gustibus non disputatum'. I too was looking for something with more
brass for the martial effect, and flute to be used in religious contexts. I
was not condemning the music on this CD, but I found it rather uninspired,
lacking in melody. What was there didn't 'remind' me of Rome, but as I said
I'm satisfied with the experience and the service.

Now, I also have "Synaulia" music from ancient Rome Vol.1
It has a wonderful booklet full of information, BUT the "music" is not very
good. Of course that's my opinion, but others have come to a similar
conclusion.

Anyway, I have a CD by Petros Tabouris of "Secular Music of Greek
Antiquity-Vol.1" that is very good! It too was accompanied by a fine booklet
and the Music is *wonderful*. I believe that this music would be much closer
to what the Romans would have had than the other so called "Roman" CD's,
well that's pure speculation on my part. I have tried to find his other
volumes but I didn't have any luck. Since that was a year or so ago I should
try again is suppose. I think I got it through http://www.cdnow.com/
In fact I just ordered:
Petros Tabouris / Aulites Ensemble : Music Of Ancient Greece 2 (CD)

Valete

4. Roman Music
From: "Lucius Equitius" <vergil@starpower.net>
7. Re: Roman Music
From: Charlie Collins <cotta@spamcop.net>
11. Re: Roman Music
From: "scott dolleck" <billgatesson@hotmail.com>

________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 23:07:06 -0400
From: "Lucius Equitius" <vergil@starpower.net>
Subject: Roman Music

Salvete,

I received my copy of "Somnia Imperii" by David Marshall on Friday.
http://www.ancestral.co.uk/romanmusic.htm

I made the order on Sept 23 and paid through "Pay Pal", so the package only
took a few days to arrive from England. I paid $27 including shipping.

Although the music seems overly 'middle eastern' influenced I'm very pleased
with the deal.

Valete, Lucius Equitius

________________________________________________________________________

Message: 7
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 23:12:40 -0500
From: Charlie Collins <cotta@spamcop.net>
Subject: Re: Roman Music

Ave Lucius Equitius,
I too ordered the album and also noted the "middle
eastern" overtone. But, I really like the music although
I would like to see another album come out with a more
martial/military theme. Still I would highly recommend
this album for anybody.

Vale,
Sextus Cornelius Cotta

________________________________________________________________________

Message: 11
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 21:44:42 -0600
From: "scott dolleck" <billgatesson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Roman Music

Salvete,

I also ordered the CD.
It's pretty good, the talking dosen't really work but the music
is great.very fast shipping!!!

Valete,
Lucius Avisius Seneca