Forum Romanum


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: On to new and great things
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 00:00:48 -0000

Salve Gens Silvane,

Thank you for your kind words and the toast. I am also a wine lover
as well. I look forward to working with you all now and in the future.
Have a great week and bountiful harvest.

Yours respectfully,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "Frank & K.C." <shamrock@c...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus
>
> Well said indeed! We of the Gens Silvanus have survived another
> season of harvesting the precious fruit that grows upon our blessed
> vines. Having spent last evening in dancing in tubs and pressing
the
> rich juice for its rebirth in many amphoras , we were delighted to
> read your post of great wisdom. Today you shall be toasted during
our
> feast for your contribution.
>
> Vale
>
> Gens Silvanus
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The gods of Rome, Wicca and Yaweh aren't
> > going to go poof and put a windfall of money in NR's coffers, the
> > gods of Rome, Wicca and Yaweh aren't going to wave their arms and
> > make miraculously appear a piece of land for Nova Roma to build
on,
> > the gods of Rome, Wicca and Yaweh will not conjur a new website
to
> > advertise to the world of the resergence of Nova Roma and I doubt
> > that the gods of Rome will raise a new temple for NR in 1 day.
> >
> > If they look at this message board which is one of
> > the first windows into NR and see that we are hostile, bickering
> and
> > have a set of lips that just don't quit, continually arguing like
> the
> > old days, I can assure you we'll be a big joke or laughing stock
> and
> > get ^%#*&@@!! (censored) all.
> >
> > I hope most of you understand my point. Lets move along from
here,
> > prey to our own Gods for guidance in our endeavours.
> >
> > Yours respectfully,
> >
> > Quintus Lanius Paulinus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Quaestorship for Manius Constantinus Serapio
From:	"mjk" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 17:17:11 -0700

Salvete omnes!

I just wish to express my happiness and admiration that Manius Constantine Serapio shall be running for the office of Quaestor. His hard work, artistic talent many projects so numerous to mention need no introduction or explanations to Nova Romans. We should all learn from his example how to be a great model Nova Roman.

I have the honor and privilege to be working under his wing in the North African project. I hope some of his talents, perseverance and abilities will rub off on me in time. All the best to you and your endeavors for the office of Quaestorship Manius.

Yours respectfully,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus
Scriba Praefecti

AFRICA SEPTENTRIONALIS
http://www.geocities.com/africa_septentrionalis/index.html

PAX ROMANA

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:25:12 EST

In a message dated 11/3/02 12:53:12 PM Pacific Standard Time,
salixastur@yahoo.es writes:

> So I would say that the fifteen days left before the beginning of the
> votation, added to the three months since the last presentation of
> these proposals, is time enough to meditate about them

Why the rush, Tribune? The college has just opened the discussion. Rome
wasn't built in a day.

Q. Fabius Maximus

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

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Curator Differium ( Newsletter editor)
From:	"lithia_cassia" <mscommunication@attbi.com>
Date:	Sun, 03 Nov 2002 21:03:24 -0000

*LOL* I guess I was too slow to apply for the job! ;)

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...> wrote:
>
>
> Salve, I hope someone can help me with these questions
>
> I see that Nova Roma has an official new letter, The Eagle, that is
not being published for wont of an editor. Is this an on-line
newsletter or the snail mail kind? How often was it published and how
often should it be published? Are there any online copies that can be
seen? What type of news is covered in it or should be. What is the
budget for the newsletter? How many people did it take to put out the
old one? Who were the writers, correspondents? Did it have
advertising?
>
> Vale,
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Fortuna Favet Fortibus
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Election Reminder
From:	"Frank & K.C." <shamrock@cros.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 01:06:11 -0000

> I have to comment that Titus Octavius Pius is doing an excellent
job! I am
> just overwhelmed by the professionalism I see within Nova Roma. I
posted my
> declaration of candidacy and it was posted on the website within 20
minutes.
> This is excellent work!
>
> G. Modius Athanasius
>>

If I may add to the list of responsible administrators: This weekend
during our Gens meeting and wine pressing, Ambrosius took some photos
so that the Gens members could "have faces" to you all. We were all
suprised as the photos appeared within minutes of submission. I'm not
sure who was responsible but my husband thought it was Germanicus. If
it was ,I want to thank him for doing it so quickly. He should be
commended for the quick response.If you are interested, most of our
Gens members photos are up and the rest will be there very shortly.
This is my first post here , so pardon me if I was incorrect in the
way I posted.

Vale,

Silvania Rhea

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: New poll for Nova-Roma: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 03 Nov 2002 23:14:06 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., me-in-@d... wrote:

> This is deep water but we are not living 2,000 years ago and I
>think most of us take for granted a religious attitude that was
>probably then the preserve only of Mystery Initiations, and a great
>deal more scientific knowledge than they possessed.

You know, I am a touch conflicted here. I don't mean to be contrary,
but I am confused by what appears to be a strange flexible standard.
(I am not saying that you, the writer of this letter, have such a
standard, but I have seen this in other places at Nova Roma.) It
seems like when things are convenient for us, we ARE living 2000
years ago. But when other things aren't too convenient, then we
AREN'T living 2000 years ago.

I have had pontiffs here preach to me about how we must kill animals
for the Gods, JUST like they did 2000 years ago, or we are not
honoring the Religio properly. But it seems that when my contention
about the treatement of the 'One God' vs. many Gods is brought up,
that I am being expected to bear in mind that we "Aren't living 2000
years ago." So, how should I proceed here? Monotheists are the ones
who have indoctrinated everyone with the (in my opinion) absurd
notion that there is only one divine force; I don't care how
philosophical you want to get about it- 2000 years ago, the vast
majority of people very certainly thought that there were MANY Gods,
not just One, or a bunch of Gods that were just aspects of a greater
one.

A wacko "pagan" philosopher or two on the side may have preached such
a thing, especially in Greece, and the fact that their writings
survive today to be called the "foundational texts of western
philosophy" is only due to the fact that Christian monotheists
weren't that offended by them, and it gave them fuel for their own
outrageous arguments in favor of their "monotheism", and so they
vastly overquoted them and lifted them from their obscurity.

There is more than one God. I have experienced them myself. They
weren't all echoes of one God. They were different Gods, just like
all of you are different people. I am following in the footsteps of
our ancestors with this attitude, and I had the veracity of their
religions confirmed for me by these experiences. I can't believe that
I have to state this at a place like NOVA ROMA which supposedly
structures itself to be in all aspects like Rome circa 200 years
before Jesus was even a gleam in Joseph's eye.

And...I don't think that Marcus Aurelius meant that you could
just "insert your personal God Name here" when he said "Zeus" in a
treatise he wrote.

Christian scholars might want to think that, because one thing that
they hate is feeling cut off from the great and powerful
philosophical heritage and wise power of Paganism and millenia of
human history, due to the fact that they embrace a religion that
stands against everything ancient religion and polytheism stands for-
they want to feel as though they share something in common with a
great man like Marcus Aurelius; they want to feel like he would have
approved of their nebulous "One God/Hebrew God/Creator/Monotheism",
by fostering attitudes that "Oh, he meant Zeus or whatever higher
power you happen to believe in" in his writing- But he wouldn't have.
He calls the Christians attention hounds and accuses them of
histrionics in public, all for the purposes of self-aggrandizement,
in his holy work, The Meditations. He had no philosophical respect
for early christians, and rightly not.

>Anyone who sincerely believes that a personal divinity created the >?
>world as is in six days (or by the 84 Million positions of sexual
>intercourse possible with as many arms as Parvatii and Siwa) is
>unlikely to be here anyway.

But I bet that there are christians here who believe that God made
the world in 6 days. Why don't you poll the christians here?

> Nor is that 'one god' usually looked on in the extreme personal
>sense attributed to Classical gods (though truer of Greece perhaps
>than of Rome).

What country do you live in? Where I come from, in the United States
of America, I can assure you of this: every single christian that I
have EVER met- and I have met HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS- FIRMLY believes
that God is "God" in the extreme personal sense. And I am willing to
bet my right eye that practically all of the christians here at Nova
Roma do too.

>It is quite clear that when Marcus Aurelius speaks of Zeus he could
>as easily be speaking of any Ultimate Force of any religion unknown
>to him.

Read what I said above. I disagree. I think that this attitude stems
from scholarly christians who wanted to lay claim to some part of the
wisdom of his work. Emperor Aurelius was talking about Zeus/Deus
Pater- the All Father of his Pantheon, and thus his Universe. Jehova
is not Jupiter/Zeus.

>The point of monotheism is usually that the divinity is a much
>grander concept than the individual persons of a pantheon.

And that is a good joke. Jehova shows human emotions like jealousy
and anger- he is wrathful, he kills, he wonders about things, has to
ask questions to humans about things he doesn't know, he even tries
to kill moses in the Old Testament, but fails- what kind of "Grander
Divinity" fails to kill a human when he tries? Jehova (and all the
rest of these monotheistic "gods") are not universal concept/grand-
scale Gods. They act more like divine humans, just like everyone
else's gods, and they are always involved in petty things like
whether or not humans are praying to them or not. If they were "Grand
Concepts" that really did shape the entire multiverse, why would they
care so much if human beings off on one corner of one galaxy and in
one solar system stroked their egos with worship?

> Conversely, original Biblical texts treat various formal names of
>the divinity in a way identical to the separate gods of a pantheon.

It is clear that Semitic polytheism was a part of early Hebrew
Culture, but in pagan socieites, the Gods are more than just "formal
names" of a singular power.

> I rather suspect the wise on both sides fully accepted that they
>were both using their most suitable language to describe the
>indescribable.

I rather suspect that the wise of any era NEVER attempted something
as futile as "describing the indescribable." The Gods ARE describable
and approachable, or we would have no religion, and our ancestors
would have had no religion.

Every polytheism has monotheistic aspects, every monotheism generates
personalised miraculous saints (even Islam) identical to pagan demi-
gods and minor deities.
> Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

But those man-made concepts ARE NOT GODS! You are making comparisons
that are just that- comparisons, but not historical reality. And
the "monotheistic" aspects of polytheism NEVER included the idea that
all these Gods might just be aspects of One over-arching God; the
idea that all the Gods drew their origins or breath from the same
source (Nature, for instance) is not the same thing as saying that
all the Gods are the same. And the "polytheistic" aspects of
monotheism are NOTHING like the true polytheism of the ancients-
there is still a sense that saints were just people. They may be holy
spirits now with intercession power, but they are NOTHING near God's
status.

Why can't other religions just leave Polytheism alone?? Are we that
cool that things like christianity just has to resolve itself with us?
And if monotheisms all evolve polytheistic tendencies, then perhaps
that shows the natural truth of polytheism.

Galus Agorius Taurinus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Poll (3rd response to Taurinus)
From:	cassius622@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:19:05 EST

Salvete,

I was unable to find the post or author that Taurinus is responding to.
However, there are a couple of ' general questions' here that seem to require
a response, so I hope no one minds my 'jumping in' to answer them.

Galus Agorius Taurinus writes:
You know, I am a touch conflicted here. I don't mean to be contrary,
but I am confused by what appears to be a strange flexible standard.
(I am not saying that you, the writer of this letter, have such a
standard, but I have seen this in other places at Nova Roma.) It
seems like when things are convenient for us, we ARE living 2000
years ago. But when other things aren't too convenient, then we
AREN'T living 2000 years ago.

Cassius respondit:
That does happen to some extent, but not deliberately. Mostly what you're
seeing are the different opinions that various Citizens and Magistrates have
on the same subjects. You'd be surprised how difficult it can be to get
nearly 2,000 people all 'on the same page' with every issue! Not that this is
a bad thing - most often Nova Roma profits from the various points of view
among its Citizens. Debate helps us to steer a 'middle way' most of the time.

Taurinus:
I have had pontiffs here preach to me about how we must kill animals
for the Gods, JUST like they did 2000 years ago, or we are not
honoring the Religio properly.

Cassius:
Not all the pontiffs agree on this issue. For instance, Pontiff Q. Fabius
Maximus is adamant that we must have live sacrifice. I, on the other hand,
feel it is not necessary or even productive in this day and age. I therefore
am against reviving it on an official basis.

Taurinus:
But it seems that when my contention
about the treatement of the 'One God' vs. many Gods is brought up,
that I am being expected to bear in mind that we "Aren't living 2000
years ago." So, how should I proceed here? Monotheists are the ones
who have indoctrinated everyone with the (in my opinion) absurd
notion that there is only one divine force; I don't care how
philosophical you want to get about it- 2000 years ago, the vast
majority of people very certainly thought that there were MANY Gods,
not just One, or a bunch of Gods that were just aspects of a greater
one.

Cassius:
Indeed it is true - before Christian monotheism came to dominate the Western
world, polytheism was practiced by the majority of people. That is something
that has changed. The Religio Romana is now a tiny minority - and in my own
opinion we can only get ourselves into trouble if we try to pretend
otherwise. The Religio by no means has to 'bow' to monotheism, but we'd
durned well better learn to live alongside it, because it's not going away.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: New poll for Nova-Roma: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 18:24:49 -0800 (PST)

--- g_agorius_taurinus <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> before Jesus was even a gleam in Joseph's eye.
(Along with other inflamitory statements)

You just can't lay off the Christian baiting can you?

Do you have some neurotic need for attention, even if
it's negative?

I Live in the same provincia as you do. I'm well aware
that SOME Christians are overbearing bigots, but YOU
are surpassing all but the worst of them. The
Christians in Nova Roma show far more respect towards
Pagans than you have shown them, and with one
exception, who is long gone, have refrained from
attacks on the Religio.

Are you delibertly attempting to stir up hatred
between Nova Roma's citizens? Are you trying to
instill hatred towards Pagans among the Christians
that look apon the Religio favorably?

Did you ever stop to think that YOU might be the
reason that so many of the Christians you have met
have such a negative view of Pagans?

=====
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!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: explanation
From:	Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:25:31 -0500

On Sunday, November 3, 2002, at 07:00 PM, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
wrote:

> The sole intent behind the Lex Salicia de
> Tribunicia Comitiorum Convocatione is to clarify and codify the legal
> procedure to choose between the Comitia Populi Tributa and the Comitia
> Plebis Tributa.
>

Thank you, Gnaeus Salix, that answered my question admirably!

-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Action and Responsibility
From:	Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:28:17 -0500

On Sunday, November 3, 2002, at 07:00 PM, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
wrote:

> I am prepared to wade through muck: I have no intention of throwing it
> at anyone else. :)

Thank you for that, then! Sorry to have misread you.

-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Poll (3rd response to Taurinus)
From:	"Sp. Postumius Tubertus" <postumius@gmx.net>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 21:47:11 -0500

Sp. Postumius Tubertus M. Cassio Iuliano et Quiritibus S.P.D.

Salvete,

<ex litteris Iuliani>

Taurinus:
I have had pontiffs here preach to me about how we must kill animals
for the Gods, JUST like they did 2000 years ago, or we are not
honoring the Religio properly.

Cassius:
Not all the pontiffs agree on this issue. For instance, Pontiff Q. Fabius
Maximus is adamant that we must have live sacrifice. I, on the other hand,
feel it is not necessary or even productive in this day and age. I therefore
am against reviving it on an official basis.

Postumius respondat Cassio:
I wouldn't even hear of the thought of sacrificing my animals to the Gods. I love and worship the Gods as best I may, but I'd rather be smitten to my death (and even after) than sacrifice my poor little puppies!

Postumius respondat Taurino:
As I see it, (and I'm sure I'll be reading to death letters from the pontifices and sacerdotes and other religious persons, as well as private citizens, about this) the Religio is what you make of it. If you choose to worship the Gods in a way contrary to how the pontifices, go ahead. So long as you don't intentionally offend the Gods (or whomever you choose to worship), that's fine with me. We're all individuals here. But then again, I'm not a pontifex.

Taurinus:
But it seems that when my contention
about the treatement of the 'One God' vs. many Gods is brought up,
that I am being expected to bear in mind that we "Aren't living 2000
years ago." So, how should I proceed here? Monotheists are the ones
who have indoctrinated everyone with the (in my opinion) absurd
notion that there is only one divine force; I don't care how
philosophical you want to get about it- 2000 years ago, the vast
majority of people very certainly thought that there were MANY Gods,
not just One, or a bunch of Gods that were just aspects of a greater
one.

Cassius:
Indeed it is true - before Christian monotheism came to dominate the Western
world, polytheism was practiced by the majority of people. That is something
that has changed. The Religio Romana is now a tiny minority - and in my own
opinion we can only get ourselves into trouble if we try to pretend
otherwise. The Religio by no means has to 'bow' to monotheism, but we'd
durned well better learn to live alongside it, because it's not going away.

Postumius respondat Taurino:
I agree. But then this prompts me to ask what I often ask my mother when we get on whether or not polytheism is good or evil, I always ask "How could people be wrong for thousands of years, and then all of a sudden, only _ONE_ man comes in and says, 'You're all wrong! There's only one God, and this is how you worship him! Oh, and by the way, all you other people that don't worship him and myself, you're going to Hell for your afterlife.' ?" Something to think about, but please, not to respond to.

Postumius respondat Cassio:
Good Sir, I am glad you hear this, that the Religio by no means should bow to monotheism. I personally haven't at all the slightest intention to bow to monotheism. Rather, even through my multitudinous bad encounters with it, I would better live alongside it, as you say, than live subjected to it, in that I would rather practice my own beliefs and they practice theirs, than have to hide my religious beliefs, as I must in my own home, unfortunately.

<Terminatio responsorum>

Optime Valete in Pace Deorum,

Sp. Postumius Tubertus
Retiarius Lacuum Magnorum
Scriba Curatoris Araneae
Discipolus Anno Tertio Linguae Latinae
Civis Lacuum Magnorum Provinciae
Civis Patriae Novae Romae, Optima Maxima

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" -- Q. Horati Flacci

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Blasphemy: Praetor's Comment
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 03 Nov 2002 20:50:25 -0600

T Labienus Fortunatus Praetor omnibus SPD

While it is unconstitutional for me to forbid the discussion of any
particular subject on this list, I do officially request that the
discussion of the pros and cons of various modern political movements,
especially fascism and socialism, be moved to private correspondence.
It is salient to Nova Roma by only the thinnest of threads, and it
almost inevitably involves strong emotions and unfortunate language.

Continued correspondence to this thread will be monitored very carefully
by the praetor and his scribae, in order to preserve the
constitutionally guaranteed right cives to a list which is moderated in
order to maintain civility.

Valete


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS, one more lex
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?M=20Arminius=20Maior?= <marminius@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 01:03:40 -0300 (ART)

Salvete

I am adding one more law to the Comita Populi Tributa,
the Lex Arminia De Rationem Edictibus. The purpose of
this law is to determine the validity of the edicts of
novaroman magistrates.

>From time to time erupt a small confusion about the
validity of a magistrate edict. The last example was
the resignation edict. This law can put an end to this
indefinition, following the historical example. And is
a way to indicate that the scribes of various
magistrates ends with their mandates.

At first i intended to present another law too,
changing the mandate of the Tribuni, to begin in
10/december instead of 01/january to follow the
historical example, but this will short the mandates
of the next Tribunes; so i prefer to let this decision
to them.

Vale
Marcus Arminius Maior
Tribunus Plebis

--- Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@yahoo.es>
escreveu: > Cn. Salix Astur Quiritibus S.P.D.
>
> Ex Officio Tribunorum Plebis.
>
> Through this port, and according to the prerogatives
> established in the
> Constitution of Nova Roma, I officially present the
> following
> legislative proposals to the Comitia:
>
> To the Comitia Populi Tributa:
> - Lex Salicia de Prorogatione et Cumulatione
> - Lex Salicia de Suffragiis in Comitia Populi
> Tributa
> - Lex Salicia Iudiciaria
> - Lex Salicia de Tribunicia Comitiorum Convocatione
>
> To the Comitia Plebis Tributa:
> - Lex Salicia de Suffragiis in Comitia Plebis
> Tributa
> - Lex Salicia de Tribunicia Comitiorum Convocatione
>
> The full text of all these proposals shall be
> submitted in my following
> messages to these same fora.
>
> These proposals shall be voted following this
> schedule:
>
> 17 November (Sunday; Comitalis) - Begin voting
> 23 November (Saturday; Comitalis) - End voting
> 26 November (Tuesday; Comitalis) - Announce voting
> results.
>
> =====
> Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
> Gnaeus Salix Astur.
> Tribunus Plebis

_______________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas f�ceis de usar, espa�o de sobra e acess�rios.
http://br.geocities.yahoo.com/

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Lex Arminia De Rationem Edictibus
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?M=20Arminius=20Maior?= <marminius@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 01:06:38 -0300 (ART)

Lex Arminia De Rationem Edictibus

The purpose of this law is to determine the validity
of the edicts of novaroman magistrates.

I. This lex is valid only for those magistrates
defined in the Article IV.A. of the Constitution, that
is, the magistrates ordinarii.

II. An edict of a magistrate is valid only until the
end of the year when that edict was issued. This
includes the term of office of a scribe or assistant,
that ends with to the term of office
of the same magistrate.

III. An edict can be revalidated in the year
following, by a sucessor magistrate, by means of
another edict, announcing which of the edicts will
stand.

IV. After the annual elections, with the names of the
new magistrates known, the Praetores will have four
nundinae (25 days) to present the valid edicts issued
by the magistrates to the new magistrates.

V. After this four nundinae, and with the new
magistrate in office, the edicts not endorsed will be
revoked.

VI. This law will be valid only since the next year,
this is, 2756 AUC or 2003 CE.

-----
Vale
Marcus Arminius Maior
Tribunus Plebis

_______________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas f�ceis de usar, espa�o de sobra e acess�rios.
http://br.geocities.yahoo.com/

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] New poll for Roma Nova: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"aarmpa" <regpoli@hotmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 03:36:36 -0000

Regarding the last post from Galus Agorius Taurinus:

". . . Christian scholars might want to think that, because one thing
that they hate is feeling cut off from the great and powerful
philosophical heritage and wise power of Paganism and millennia of
human history . . ."
Phisophical heritage? Wisdom? I don't understand what you mean? Do
you feel that Christianity has no merit? Why do you feel that
Paganism is a superior religion? Do you have any facts to back up
this statement? How much do you know actually know about
Christianity? I am not a pagan and have no knowledge of this
religion, but I have no reason to criticize another persons beliefs!

"Anyone who sincerely believes that a personal divinity created the
world as is in six days . . . is unlikely to be here anyway."

As a Catholic, I have talked to priests who believe that the six days
in the Bible is more a metaphore than an actual time period. Not all
Catholics (Christians) take the Bible literally.

As I said I don't know about paganism. I wish I had a better
knowledge of Catholism to help me bring my points more clearly. But
as I have said, I see no benefit of tearing down somebody else's
beliefs!

I am a new member and I don't understand why there is such acrimony
on this site? I joined this group because of my love of Rome and all
things Roman but I am disappointed that the majority of the posts
seem to be concentrating on religion (paganism vs. Christianity)and
nothing else. Aren't there other topics that are discussed in this
group? Why can't everyone agree to disagree and move on to less
heated subjects????

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Action & Responsibility
From:	"Circe Aeaea" <osculum@bigpond.com.au>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 14:57:35 +1100

Salve...
Perhaps I'm a bit late jumping in here, in fact I'm not sure exactly what
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis is responding to as I've deleted all my past
digests... but anyway then Jamie replies to him and says "It means nothing
more sophisticated than 'do what you want'." I think Jamie is referring to
Crowley's advice to "Do What Thou Wilt" (- if not then just skip over my 2
cents worth here)...

As an initiate of the (modern Mystery Cult), the *Ordo Templi Orientis*,
which was at one time headed by and highly influenced by Aleister Crowley
the way I understand "Do What Thou Wilt" is that it refers to one's "True
Will", not just something someone may want to do on the spur of the moment.
The "True Will" is one's overriding purpose here in this earthly
incarnation, the Great Work of our life which, yes, can manifest in both
noble and ignoble ways - I suppose it depends on the observer, one man's
meat is another man's poison. "Do What Thou Wilt" means, IMO, to do your
true will as best as you can discern it... not just do whatever you like
whenever you like.

Vale
Tullia Sentia Silvana.

>>Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis wrote:

> This sort of thing can go into ethical melt-down of course. I tend to
think of Aleister > Crowley's "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the
law". Firstly, he included the > time factor: what thou Wilt is not
necessarily what you want right now. For
> instance, I might will to be a graduate but I want to spend the time
getting drunk:
> what I Will must make a commitment overriding what I want at any specific
time.

At the risk of seeming pedantic, I take issue with your interpretation of
this quotation. 'What thou wilt' means 'what you want' or 'what you intend'.
In Elizebethan / Jacobean English (and still technically in modern English,
though usage has slipped) 'will' didn't have any particular connotation
about time or timescale. 'What you will' doesn't mean 'what you are going to
do', nor does it mean 'what you would like to occur over a long period of
time'. At the time when Crowley wrote, to say 'do what thou wantst' would
have been nonsensical - it would mean 'do what you lack' or 'do what you
need to have'. So the quotation clearly can't carry any implied distinction
between what one wills and what one wants in the way that you suggest. It
means nothing more sophisticated than 'do what you want'.

Jamie<<

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS, one more lex
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:24:18 -0800 (PST)

--- M Arminius Maior <marminius@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
> Salvete

>
> At first i intended to present another law too,
> changing the mandate of the Tribuni, to begin in
> 10/december instead of 01/january to follow the
> historical example, but this will short the mandates
> of the next Tribunes; so i prefer to let this
> decision
> to them.
>
>
> Vale
> Marcus Arminius Maior
> Tribunus Plebis

The terms of office for the Tribunes along with the
other ordinarii are set in section IV a. of Nova
Roma's constitution. Changing the terms to start on
the historic December 10 will require an admendment.
It will have to be presented to the comitia centuriata
rather than to the comitiae that the tribunes are
empowered to call.

That being said, I would like to see next years
Consuls consider changing the tribune's term of office
to the historic dates. Rather than shorting the terms
after the Tribunes are elected this year this change
should take effect with the the Tribunes elected next
year whose term of office would extend from Jan. 1
2004 to December 9 2004.

=====
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!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] The Eagle Newsletter
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:28:56 -0500

Salve, Honored Senator,

Thank you for this information on the Eagle as I am most likely going to stand in this election for Curator Differum and Quaestor. If I am elected CD I would very much like to obtain copies of anything that you think I might find useful.
Again my thanks.

Vale,

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Fortuna Favet Fortibus

----- Original Message -----
From: jmath669642reng@webtv.net
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 5:04 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] The Eagle Newsletter

Master Paulinus;

I had the privilege of serving as the Curator Differum, as a "pick-up"
editor for a period of about 5-6 months during the Dictatorship of
Germanicus. The copies of the "Eagle" then went out monthly, to about
50+ subscribers. Many of those subscribers are still on the list
awaiting the completion of thier subscriptions.

The newsletter in those days was put together by myself essentally, with
some help from a few contributors. It was then sent to Cassius who
printed it as a donation to Nova Roma, for which I honor him greatly,
and then the newsletter was mailed to the subscribers, by myself, with
postage donated to Nova Roma.

I have endeavored to collect as many of the old issues as I have been
able to save, since I have been a subscriber and a writer for the
"Eagle" since it's first issue. As I indicated earlier, the "Eagle"
idea had many different facets when it was first introduced, but those
ideas slowkly fell away when it was realized that there would never be
enough people interested in such an activity. Over the years I have
attempted to put together a Sodalitas Newsletter, and a Provincial
Newsletter as a possible supplement to the "Eagle' but both have met
with the same problems and he same result.

The "Eagle" was a good idea, in my view, and at one time I had floated
the idea of making it into an "on-line" newsletter similar to the XXth
and XXIVth Legion's newsletter, and several other newsletters to which I
donate articles in other reenactment eras. However, in order to
maintain such an effort one must have dedicated people who are in a
settled situation to some extent. I have, in the past, edited,
published and maintained a bi-monthly newsletter for the 42nd Regiment
of Foot (Black Watch) Rennactment Unit for nearly five years, by mysef,
so I know whereof that I speak.

I still think that the "Eagle" is a good idea, and many of the
peripheral ideas that grew up around the central idea were good ones,
however, in order to maintain such an organ, there must be a solid basis
of desire for doing such, financing from the parent organization (which
may now be available) and some strong degree of agreement and dedication
on the part of an editor and a small staff of newswriters.

In addition, the past subscribers, should be reimbursed from NR funds,
if a new Differum is not established this year, or if such a person is
appointed, those subscribers should rightly be guaranteed a full set of
issues in coming years or a prompt reimbursement of thier remaining
subscription value.

The articles themselves were much as Senior Consul Octavius has
indicated. The advertising when it was established was usually
advertising from our own Macellum, or from businesses related to Nova
Roma and / or Roman Antiquity.

I hope the above will help you in the pursuence of your questions. I
have also suggested this aspect of communicatiion to other areas within
Nova Roma, but until I have completed these arrangements, if indeed they
will be completed, I am not free to discuss them on the Main List of
course. If you are further interested, I should be pleased to answer
your questions off list.

Respectfully;

Marcus Minucius Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary

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]

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Blasphemy: Praetor's Comment
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:36:56 -0500

Salve,

I will forgo responding to this thread from this point on. There was no intent on anybody's part to do any harm to anybody in Nova Roma. For me the discussion is over.

Vale,

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Fortuna Favet Fortibus

----- Original Message -----
From: Fortunatus
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:58 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Blasphemy: Praetor's Comment

T Labienus Fortunatus Praetor omnibus SPD

While it is unconstitutional for me to forbid the discussion of any
particular subject on this list, I do officially request that the
discussion of the pros and cons of various modern political movements,
especially fascism and socialism, be moved to private correspondence.
It is salient to Nova Roma by only the thinnest of threads, and it
almost inevitably involves strong emotions and unfortunate language.

Continued correspondence to this thread will be monitored very carefully
by the praetor and his scribae, in order to preserve the
constitutionally guaranteed right cives to a list which is moderated in
order to maintain civility.

Valete

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] New poll for Roma Nova: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:44:58 -0800 (PST)

--- aarmpa <regpoli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am a new member and I don't understand why there
> is such acrimony
> on this site? I joined this group because of my love
> of Rome and all
> things Roman but I am disappointed that the majority
> of the posts
> seem to be concentrating on religion (paganism vs.
> Christianity)and
> nothing else. Aren't there other topics that are
> discussed in this
> group? Why can't everyone agree to disagree and move
> on to less
> heated subjects????
>
Salve,
There is no general acrimony between Christians and
Pagans in Nova Roma. The Person making the acrimonius
posts has been a citizen for about 1 week.

I Have been a citizen for allmost 2 years and in all
that time there was less Religious hostility in Nova
Roma than than this one new citizen has stirred up in
a week. You just happened to join at a bad time. This
hostility over religion is not the norm in Nova Roma.
(Though I can't say the same for Nova Roman Politics)

Prior to last week the relationship between Christians
and Pagans was mostly one of mutal respect, and I
assure you that the vast majority of us still respect
each others beliefs.

=====
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!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS, one more lex
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?M=20Arminius=20Maior?= <marminius@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 01:47:08 -0300 (ART)

Salvete

--- "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
escreveu: >
> --- M Arminius Maior <marminius@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
> > Salvete
>
> >
> > At first i intended to present another law too,
> > changing the mandate of the Tribuni, to begin in
> > 10/december instead of 01/january to follow the
> > historical example, but this will short the
> mandates
> > of the next Tribunes; so i prefer to let this
> > decision
> > to them.
> >
> >
> > Vale
> > Marcus Arminius Maior
> > Tribunus Plebis
>
> The terms of office for the Tribunes along with the
> other ordinarii are set in section IV a. of Nova
> Roma's constitution. Changing the terms to start on
> the historic December 10 will require an admendment.
> It will have to be presented to the comitia
> centuriata
> rather than to the comitiae that the tribunes are
> empowered to call.

MAIOR: My first intention is to confirm the will of
the plebs, proposing this law in the Comitia Plebis
(the Tribuni are plebeian magistrates after all), then
seeking for the Comitia Centuriata and the 2/3 Senate
approval.

> That being said, I would like to see next years
> Consuls consider changing the tribune's term of
> office
> to the historic dates. Rather than shorting the
> terms
> after the Tribunes are elected this year this change
> should take effect with the the Tribunes elected
> next
> year whose term of office would extend from Jan. 1
> 2004 to December 9 2004.
> =====
> L. Sicinius Drusus

Vale
Marcus Arminius Maior

_______________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas f�ceis de usar, espa�o de sobra e acess�rios.
http://br.geocities.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] New poll for Roma Nova: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 00:03:00 -0500

Salve, L. Sicinius Drusus well said

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

----- Original Message -----
From: L. Sicinius Drusus
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:00 AM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] New poll for Roma Nova: Polytheism and Monotheism

--- aarmpa <regpoli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am a new member and I don't understand why there
> is such acrimony
> on this site? I joined this group because of my love
> of Rome and all
> things Roman but I am disappointed that the majority
> of the posts
> seem to be concentrating on religion (paganism vs.
> Christianity)and
> nothing else. Aren't there other topics that are
> discussed in this
> group? Why can't everyone agree to disagree and move
> on to less
> heated subjects????
>
Salve,
There is no general acrimony between Christians and
Pagans in Nova Roma. The Person making the acrimonius
posts has been a citizen for about 1 week.

I Have been a citizen for allmost 2 years and in all
that time there was less Religious hostility in Nova
Roma than than this one new citizen has stirred up in
a week. You just happened to join at a bad time. This
hostility over religion is not the norm in Nova Roma.
(Though I can't say the same for Nova Roman Politics)

Prior to last week the relationship between Christians
and Pagans was mostly one of mutal respect, and I
assure you that the vast majority of us still respect
each others beliefs.

=====
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!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

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]

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Roman Exhibit in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada / Roman Machine Gun
From:	"mjk" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 00:03:41 -0700

Salvete omnes,

Just a quick report on the Roman exhibit in Edmonton, Alberta Canada as promised.

The exhibition is at the Provincial Museum of Alberta put on courtesy of the Provincial museum and Italian government. It started October 15 and will be running until April / 2003. The exhibition creates a picture of Ancient Roman culture that is very well detailed and creates a deep understanding and appreciation of Roman civilization. The various artifacts reflect the artistic character of Ancient Rome over various periods. Some are connected to very recent research while others come from the archives held within Italian museums. Apparently many of these artifacts had not been seen for some time and now they are displayed and re-evaluated by more recent scholarship.

The exhibition covers 1000 years from the 8th century BC (Etruscan period) to AD 244 when upon the death of Gordion 111, the last emperor to be named by the senate with the Empire at its peak but starting teater on its decline. The exhibition includes ceramics, terracottas, portraits and reliefs, sarcophigai and urns, bronze and marble statues, pieces created by toreutics and silversmithing, gems, cameos, jeewels, glass, coins, not to mention helmets, chariot wheels, scientific instruments, model villas and a hands on recreated Roman kitchen! The over 500 artifacts came from Mueseums in Tuscany, Florence, Pompeii, the Capitoline Museum in Rome and the Museum of Roman Civilization in Rome.

I really enjoyed and learned a lot from the exhibition. You can be sure that I will be visting it several times more before it closes and encougage many of my layman friends to see it as well.

I got a great bonus on my visit. As in all exhibitions there was a gift shop and lo and behold I found a book based on a British TV series called " What the Romans Did For Us" This book was recommended to me by a fellow in another club because he said it finally explained a little about the Roman machine gun seen on Constantine's column. We were discussing that about 2 months ago at4nrbasics course. Here goes - " Ballistae could be built in different sizes - arm lengths ranged from 60 - 120 centimeters. Modern experiments with ballistae have shown at the lower end of the range have shown that stones weighing half a kilogram could be hurled some 300 metres. Larger weapons could have sent 3kg missiles even farther. Modern speed tests show that ballista bolts can fly through the air at a terrifying 50 metres per second! "

" The Romans were said to have used a repeating ballista that worked like a machine gun with a huge magazine of bolts. The operator turned a handle to turn a cam mechanism that drew the string and allowed fresh bolts to be loaded automatically. Continuosly firing it must have been a frightening weapon, but operators did not find it pratical. They ended up firing too many bolts at the same target."

I have a nice color picture of a reconstructed manchine in the book. Apparently if you can find the BBC program, you see a live demonstration of the repeating ballista! Other test firings of these weapons showed that a force of 100 men could fire about 2000 arrows in only 15 seconds! The main drawback with the Roman machine was that once set up the sighting could not be altered so you could only ambush attackers crossing "a" particular piece of ground.

Regards -

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Scriba Praefecti

AFRICA SEPTENTRIONALIS
http://www.geocities.com/africa_septentrionalis/index.html

PAX ROMANA

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Candidacy as Tribunus Plebis - Marcus Marcius Rex
From:	"rexmarciusnr" <RexMarcius@aol.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 07:12:57 -0000

Marcus Marcius Rex quiritibus salutem plurimum dicit
Hodie ego, civis Novae Romae, ad rem publicam accedo.

Today I, Marcus Marcius Rex, citizen of Nova Roma, stand in this
Forum to offer myself as a candidate for the office of Tribunis
Plebis.

I have stood here in this forum many times before to voice my
opinions on issues regarding the conduct of State affairs, musing
about their legality and constitutionality. However, it is one thing
to voice your opinion sitting on the side fences, another to
translate them into action and to be held accountable for it. I
myself want to take this step now and I want to again serve our
community in an official capacity as one of your Tribunes.

To be honest, if you had asked me whether I would stand here today
one and a half years ago, which was soon after I quit my citizenship,
I would have probably just laughed and shrugged it off as one of
those things that will never happen as Nova Roma was certainly
doomed.

But history has proven many wrong and I am - I hope - no lesser
admitting to that I was wrong in my own case. I have returned to Nova
Roma following the applicable law and procedures and I have rightly
suffered all the consequences for my resignation. I used to be a
Senator in Nova Roma and I am no longer.

Still what I can offer you - should you choose to elect me - is my
experience in government affairs and the law (both macronational and
in Nova Roma) and my undying belief in justice and the rule of law.
The Tribunes in Nova Roma should be the ultimate guarantors of just
that.

As Tribunus Plebis I shall endeavour to uphold the interests of all
citizens, exercising intercessio to secure and defend the rights of
each and every citizen according to our own Constitution and our
Laws, and to use the Tribunician legislative prerogatives only in the
utmost political urgencies. This is how I wish to serve you, if you
so let me.

Avete et Valete

Marcus Marcius Rex


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] (In)Action & Responsibility
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Johnston?= <jamiekjohnston@yahoo.co.uk>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:39:06 +0000 (GMT)

Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis wrote:

> You've missed Crowley's point here. I believe that example was his, if not then a
> follower's. The timescale is implied in that 'Will' is a 'heavier' intention than 'feel
> like'. What Thou Wilt, especially in the magickal contexts Crowley moved in,
> implies always an act of deliberate intention to bring some effect about. The
> contrast was with its interpretation as 'If it feels good, do it'. 'What thou wilt' may
> involve periods when it doesn't feel good at all, such as an athlete willing and
> therefore training to succeed.

I shall take your word for it that this is what Crowley intended, especially if he himself explained it in this way. My apologies for assuming that it was your interpretation of the English grammar used in his statement that was wrong: I stand corrected, and I see now that it was in fact Crowley's own use of English grammar which was faulty. :)

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] Election Reminder
From:	Kristoffer From <from@darkeye.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 12:29:36 +0100

AthanasiosofSpfd@aol.com wrote:
> I have to comment that Titus Octavius Pius is doing an excellent job! I am
> just overwhelmed by the professionalism I see within Nova Roma. I posted my
> declaration of candidacy and it was posted on the website within 20 minutes.
> This is excellent work!

Salve, Gai Modi Athanasi.

Thank you humbly for your kind praise. I do try to keep the list as
current as possible, and the programs written by Marcus Octavius
Germanicus helps a great deal in doing so. He has, basically, made the
entire site as user-friendly and easily maintained as has been possible.
I can't wait to see the diligence he's shown first as Curator Araneum,
and then as a consul, applied to the position of censor. I'm sure he'll
do more than merely well there, as he's done in all other positions he's
occupied. *coughvoteforoctaviuscough*

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] ARMINIUS FAUSTUS FOR QUAESTOR!
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Lucius=20Arminius=20Faustus?= <lafaustus@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:26:01 -0300 (ART)

Salvete,

(This multitude looking me at the Rostra and my poor rethoric make me afraid of my words. From this tribune, may I tell you I�m nervous? ... may the muse Polimnia come on my aid!)

Citizens, after long time thinking about, I hereby humbly declare my candidacy for the position of Quaestor.

Why?

We have long time discussing on the main list and Senate about the taxes. As a questor from a country affected by these (and in great need of these) changes, I have pretty confidence that I can make real the increasing of Assidui citizens a reality by the application of this very good Senate�s proposal of tax variation. And you can be sure that I do support anyone that support this very good proposal (I will not say names, because I can easy forget someone!). My candidacy is not a simple way to start the Cursus Honorum as many others, but it�s deeply attached to the spirit of the questorship. I will be the right hand of the Senate on this matter.

I worked long time on the Provincial level gathering people to Nova Roma on that time as the organization of the Temple of Concordia. But what gave me confidence to run for anything was the work of Interpreter. You can see the revolution started in Nova Roma by the Decuria of Interpreters and the great work done by me and the very good team of translators. This job, and this oportunity the Senate has given me, I didn�t fail, and the lonely and silent work of Portuguese translator was done... there still much to do, but this job has already showed its value, as the many brazilians that entered NR since the pages was translated.

I have just one proposal, a LARGE proposal: The increasing on citizens from all world. On this work of Hercules, you, from America to Europe, can be sure: This is my flag and my main objective.

Citizens, besides in all my NR life I worked with words, I will not show you words on a thousand proposals! My silent job can prove you my dedication to the res Publica. I already did it on the language, now let�s work on taxes. I adress to all Gods my calling, to the provincial worshipped Concordia, Pax et Salus, to queen Minerva, father Mars and supplier Vulcanus, to the unknown Gods of religious respect for each sincere personal beliefs, to king Mercurius, patron of the Interpreters, and Juno Moneta of the taxes, with them as my witness, I officially wear the most white toga on the Forum, kiss all the babies and shake your hands. (Oh, citizens, do not mock me! I�ve just out of the biggest elections of History where on the province, politics are on the eyes!)

On my office you can see all my works: http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/lafaustus/index.html
And also take a look on the Temple of Concordia:
http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/lafaustus/aedes/aedes.html

Finishing (uff!) I ask votes from all citizens, USA, Europe, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, all Latin America, Asia, everyone... You all know the diplomacy and dedication that citizens of gens Arminia are known. My proposal and objectives are very solid. Remember, Arminius Faustus for quaestor!

L. Arminius Faustus

Scriba propraetoris Brasiliae, scriba tribuni plebis.

Member of Decuriae Interpretes - (portuguese chair)

Visit my office at http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/lafaustus/index.html

Se de �cio estou, divirto-me escrevendo,

Entre os defeitos meus, este enumero...

Satira Quarta, Hor�cio

---------------------------------
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas f�ceis de usar, espa�o de sobra e acess�rios.

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] List conflict (was Poll)
From:	Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 07:31:14 -0500

On Monday, November 4, 2002, at 06:29 AM, Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
wrote:

> I am a new member and I don't understand why there is such acrimony
> on this site? I joined this group because of my love of Rome and all
> things Roman but I am disappointed that the majority of the posts
> seem to be concentrating on religion (paganism vs. Christianity)and
> nothing else. Aren't there other topics that are discussed in this
> group? Why can't everyone agree to disagree and move on to less
> heated subjects????
>

Unfortunately, you're coming in at the tail end of one of our
controversial spells. We're not always like this, but this list does
generate a certain amount of debate, especially now as we're heading
into the political campaign season. Disagreement, debate and politics
were as much a part of life in the Roman forum as they are today, and I
don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. However, it's been
recognized for several years now that not everyone wants to be part of
it, and many people would prefer to pursue their interests in ancient
Rome in a more sedate environment. For this reason, Nova Roma has many
sodalitates centered on different aspects of Roman history and culture.
I encourage you to explore the list of these at the NR Web site:

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

Also, of course, this list is what you make it. Rather than enter the
debate, why not post about something that interests you? Ask a
question, or answer another's point. Offer a review of the most recent
Roman book you read. Consider how you could contribute your energies
toward making Nova Roma a better place.

And welcome!

-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Curator Differium (newsletter editor)
From:	Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 07:33:47 -0500

Lithia, no, you're not too late! I encourage you (and any other who
might be interested) to run for the office and give Nova Roma's
citizens a chance to chose among you based on your abilities and
experience. Whoever wins the job will need the help of other interested
people to make this project happen, so it would probably be in
everyone's best interest to run a positive campaign and be prepared to
work with your former opponent afterward, but NR needs all the
editorial skills it can get.

-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Scipio for quaestor? Arminius Faustus also!
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Lucius=20Arminius=20Faustus?= <lafaustus@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:40:23 -0300 (ART)

Salve,

It is a great pleasure know that one of my finest friend, Sextus Appolonius Scipio, is running also for quaestor. We have a great experience of team work on the Decuria of Interpreters and have pretty confidence that the questorship will be enlighted by our experience and hard work.

L. Arminius Faustus

Scriba propraetoris Brasiliae, scriba tribuni plebis.

Member of Decuriae Interpretes - (portuguese chair)

Visit my office at http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/lafaustus/index.html

Se de �cio estou, divirto-me escrevendo,

Entre os defeitos meus, este enumero...

Satira Quarta, Hor�cio

---------------------------------
Yahoo! GeoCities
Tudo para criar o seu site: ferramentas f�ceis de usar, espa�o de sobra e acess�rios.

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Scipio for quaestor? Arminius Faustus also!
From:	Sextus Apollonius Scipio <scipio_apollonius@mailservice.ms>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 14:11:15 +0100

Salvete Omnes,

> It is a great pleasure know that one of my finest friend, Sextus Appolonius
> Scipio, is running also for quaestor. We have a great experience of team work
> on the Decuria of Interpreters and have pretty confidence that the
> questorship will be enlighted by our experience and hard work.

Illustrious L. Arminius Faustus has proven how much he could do for Nova Roma.
He is a hard worker: Translating is a long and never-ending job!!
I put all my confidence in this noble man.

Valete,

--
Sextus Apollonius Scipio

Propraetor Galliae
Sodalitas Egressus, Praefectus for France
Scriba Explorator Primus Academiae Thules
Scriba Fiscalis Primus Academiae Thules
NRLandProject, acting Praefectus Pecuniae
French Translator

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through MailService.MS -> http://www.MailService.ms

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Acrimony (was New poll...)
From:	labienus@novaroma.org
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 08:10:06 US/Central

Salvete

> I am a new member and I don't understand why there is such acrimony
> on this site? I joined this group because of my love of Rome and all
> things Roman but I am disappointed that the majority of the posts
> seem to be concentrating on religion (paganism vs. Christianity)and
> nothing else. Aren't there other topics that are discussed in this
> group? Why can't everyone agree to disagree and move on to less
> heated subjects????

Subjects come and go on the list. The controversial ones tend, unsurprisingly,
to spark conversation, debate, and tempers. And, it is generally those people
who feel most strongly about an issue that feel compelled to contribute to a
given thread. This naturally, and unfortunately, leads to some rather heated
arguments, as people tend to respond to verbal barbs in kind. And, the nature
of e-mail conversation makes it very easy to misconstrue the intended tone of
someone's message.

In general, I've found Nova Romans to be quite willing to respect others'
opinions on most any subject, so long as their opinions are accorded the same
respect in turn. Don't take the current acrimony to be usual. It's just an
sign of how strongly some of us feel about our various beliefs. And, compared
to some lists I've been on, this is positively tame.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] new citizen-welcome to Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:45:25 +0100

Salvete!

>I am very pleased and honored to announce that I have
>been adopted into the gens Moravia. Thank you to Diana
>Moravia Aventina for such a warm welcome.
>Arnamentia Moravia Aurelia

And Gens Moravia is happy to announce that within one week of being able to
'reopen' the doors to our domus, we have a new citizen'
On behalf of all of Gens Moravia, a warm welcome to Arnamentia Moravia
Aurelia. Welcome to the family sis!
Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: DECLARATION: OCTAVIUS for CENSOR
From:	"Lucius Equitius" <vergil@starpower.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 10:09:22 -0500

Censor Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Quiritibus SPD

I am most pleased that Consul Marcus Octavius Germanicus has declared to run
for Censor in the upcoming elections. He has my complete trust and I can
think of no one who is more capable or worthy.

As he has so straight forwardly stated below he has developed the website
and the citizens database to it's current status. His expertise, hard work
and dedication have made possible, more than any other citizen, the growth
and prosperity of Nova Roma.

In addition, I've found Consul M Octavius to be most willing to consider all
sides of a situation and to be flexible, and very willing to change. In all
honesty we have not always agreed, he and I, but he has always given
respectful consideration of my opinion. As far as I have observed he has
been consistent with everyone regardless of their situation.

He has been a pleasure to know and work with over the net as well as to meet
in person, and I look forward to seeing him again soon.

Di nos ament.

Valete bene in pace deorum

> III Non. Novembras MMDCCLV a.u.c.
>
> Civibus Novae Romae M. Octavius Germanicus salutem plurinam dicit,
>
> Citizens of Nova Roma, I come before you today to declare my
> candidacy for the office of CENSOR.

> In June of that
> year, the Senate unanimously voted to transfer the web site
> www.novaroma.org to my server and to use the new database and
> tools for citizen information.
>
> As a result of this,..., the treasury of Nova Roma has saved over
> $200 each year in hosting fees.
>
> The next year, ... My online calendar provides Roman
> dates in the traditional form, easy visual identification of days
> on which voting or public business is permitted, or religious
> festivals are scheduled, and scheduling of events by citizens.
>
> I was next elected Consul, ... ,
> preserving our history for the study of future citizens.
>
> To protect our name, I filed for a trademark of "NOVA ROMA"... He has
since discussed the matter
> with the trademark examiner and we expect the mark to be
> issued early next year.
>
> Although I held two offices, Consul and Curator, I continued to
> assist the Censores as scriba,... , and I hope to have three more
> languages on the new citizen application by the end of the year.
>
> I authored several laws this year, ... I authored a proposed
> lex guaranteeing the right of any citizen to leave a gens by their
> own choice; this was eventually issued as an edict by the Censores.
>
> I attended two meetings of Citizens this year. In June, I attended
> and photographed "Roman Days" in Maryland,... I intend to
> return to both these events next year.
>
> Citizens, I ask you to elect me as Censor...; I can (as the need arises)
modify these to add extra
> capabilities to the system, or increase efficiency.
>
> I believe that, because I designed and built the system used by the
> past four Censores, supported and advised each of them, and am on
> excellent terms with my future colleague C. Flavius Diocletianus,
> I am the ideal candidate for Censor. I ask for your support.
>
> Valete,
> Marcus Octavius Germanicus,
> http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Princeps Senatus
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 07:17:43 -0800 (PST)

Salvete The Junior Consul is unable to post and has
asked me to forward this to the list.

--- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> Now that m. Octaivius has brought that proposal. I
> really think that the following should be added:
>
> 1. Those who have been Censors should have a better
> chance in being PS.
> 2. It should take 2/3 Senatorial Vote to appoint a
> PS. (since he has the highest auctoritas and
> dignitas it shouldnt be too hard to get).
> 3. Should not be a life time appointment. Thats
> too Imperial for my taste...it should be renewed
> like it did in the old Republic.
>
> Agreements? Disagreements?
>
> Sulla
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: Fw: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 07:19:19 -0800 (PST)

Salvete,
Another Post forwarded for The Junior Consul
--- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: L. Cornelius Sulla
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 6:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
>
>
> Avete Omnes,
>
> I disagree with my colleague. Every year since Nova
> Roma's existence this problem has cropped up. I
> think it behooves our Pontiffs and citizens in
> general to have swift and decisive action. If we do
> not keep the pressure up on the CP it will not be
> resolved. Remember citizens it took them over a
> YEAR to decide on a calendar (mind you not even to
> change the calendar just to decide). If the
> Pontiffs want to keep the confidence and support of
> the citizens at large they should act.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Marcus Octavius Germanicus
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
>
>
> Salve Luci Sicini,
>
> > The Leges need to be carefuly reviewed by the
> citizens
> > before they are voted on. The Canidates postions
> need
> > to be reviewed. The Blasphemy issuse needs to be
> > carefuly considered.
>
> As the "Blasphemy" issue may require a
> Constitutional change,
> and as we are awaiting a recommendation from the
> Collegium
> Pontificum, I respectfully submit that it is an
> issue for
> next year's magistrates. With two months
> remaining in
> the current administration, there just isn't time
> for
> major changes to the Constitution to be given
> appropriate
> consideration.
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
> --
> Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
> Candidate for Censor 2756:
> http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/
>
>
> 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.
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/


Subject:	RE: [Nova-Roma] The Eagle Newsletter & Roman Times
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 16:47:53 +0100

Salvete,

I received a few of the Eagle newsletters from our most Honorable Marcus
Minucius Audens back in 1999. The newsletter was about 10 pages and was very
interesting. I was disappointed last year when I saw that it had been
discontinued. I was going to volunteer to be its editor, but later changed
my mind, because I currently edit 3 other publications. In any case, when
the Eagle is resurrected, I will be happy to send in articles in order to
make the editor's life a bit easier :-)

In the meantime, we have a very nice 'online' news, that is posted on the
website below. We will be updating it regularly. This week is of course
dedicated to our Consul candidate, the Honorable Caeso Fabius Quintilianus.

This is not an official Nova Roma publication, but will always have news of
interest to Nova Romans. And we will very often take a look on the 'lighter
side' of things, since there are quite a few of us with a very warped sense
of humor ;-)

Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina

The Campaign-site of Caeso Fabius Quintilianus for Consul 2756 for
Integrity, Accountability & Reform
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cfq_for_consul/index.html

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Princeps Senatus
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:51:22 -0600 (CST)

> > Now that m. Octaivius has brought that proposal. I
> > really think that the following should be added:

We have come to an agreement on this issue. The full text
of the proposal will be posted here today. (The proposal
has been altered to merely establish the office, without
naming a specific candidate).

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Candidate for Censor 2756:
http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: New poll for Nova-Roma: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:54:55 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : g_agorius_taurinus <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
To : Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com

I won't edit this because it's more in the way of a general reply than specific points. There are certainly differences in emphasis between developed polytheism and montotheism but they do tend to merge except where so-alled fundamentalists stick to their interpretation of primitive notions. You are quite right that the early Biblical divinity is as personal as any pagan one and may in reality have been more than one later conflated, but that 'god of srael' was by definition part of a pantheon contrasted with all the people and places that were not Israel. conversely, the only continuous developed pagan tradition we have is Indian and it is only in (perhaps Christian-inspired) sects like Krishna Consciousness that a personal divinity is taken as the basis and the impersonal somehow derived from it. Even the Bhagavadgita presents Krishna's Cosmic Form as beyond all human comprehension. If it were not, the human mind would be able to encompass the divine and 'divine' would have lost its meaning.
The worst thing monotheism does is to take the polytheistic view of one personal near-comprehensible divine personage as the sole Ultimate Unknowable. the very fact that pagans could unite divinities shows that they were aware of a single harmonius Cosmos - taken further, the word Aatman means both personal self and cosmic Force. If Ra and Amun or Iuppiter and Zeus were different 'beings' there would be religious wars over which was the 'right' and 'true' divine expression of the Power relevent. This did not happen. Instead Amun-Ra develops and becomes Amon-Ra-Zeus, while conversely aspects of individual divinities develop as characters in their own right and eventually it even becomes possible to manufacture godmen like Serapis (and possibly Jesus). Hinduism would deal with this more rationally by making them incarnations and avatars of the base divinities.
As far as I am concerned, divinity by definition is beyond definable experience, though may perhaps be experienced in the sense of becoming one. All divinities, as experienced as other can only be subjective interpretations of something beyond the experiencer's rationality. That is why Egyptians have symbolic animals and Hindus multitudinous limbs. I don't see all gods as expression of a personal divinity any more than all matter is expression of a single element. At the same time, all matter is expression of a single incomprehensible Energy even though it goes about its business without being under some central control by that Energy as if it were a separate thing.
I know many Americans have a very primitive view of religion. Many of them are far more polytheistic than polytheists because they will describe their personalised god in detail as the 'one and only' while denouncing the 'Muslim' and 'Jewish' gods as entirely different beings in their own right, not as different interpretations of the same references in the same texts and go further to award the deities (Or even non-deities like the Buddha) of other religions a status as enemies of their pet deity - let alone the overwhelming power they attribute in all things to the divinity they treat as most powerful of all: the Satan Jews and Muslims regard as little more than a licensed nuisance. True monotheists would not accept the existence of these other beings. It is a form of hybris: my god[s] are limited to my understanding of them; there could be no god greater than my ability to understand. Such a god, in my view, is no god because lesser than the devotee.
It is known that there was enormous interest and cross-over between pagan and Jewish philosophy in the Empire and some Christian sects probably arose from that. Once Jews left their homeland, they had to understand something more than their spiteful tribal deity. Once pagans started considering the Cosmos might be rational, they had to find some unifying rationale for it. Plato's abstract Ideals fall far too well into the rationale of a single creator which he did not have (and put the human race on a wrong defeatist track much of it is still pursuing).
The gods, as far as we are experience, are emotional-spiritual symbols just as the material world uses mathematical symbols: the symbols are not the real thing beyond our ability to experience or, for those few who have experienced, beyond ability to communicate.
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] forwarded messages from LC Sulla
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 17:08:07 +0100

Salve Drusus,
Each person who joins this list or changes email address remains on
moderated for a few days. This seems to be the rule and from what I've seen,
is implemented in all cases.
I am happy that after announcing his refusal to pay taxes and unsubscribing
from the main list
(quite angrily I believe), Lucius Cornelius Sulla has had a change of heart
and has decided to return to us just in time for the elections. But this
rule should be applied to him as well.

I don't believe that forwarding Sulla's emails is fair to the new people who
haven't a compatriot here on the main list to do this for them. We are all
interested in LC Sulla's opinion, and we can all wait a few extra hours or
even days to hear them. I believe that Sulla's legacy will not be forgotten
in a matter of a mere few days.

Vale (and Shalom back)
Diana Moravia Aventina

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: L. Sicinius Drusus [mailto:lsicinius@yahoo.com]
Verzonden: maandag 4 november 2002 16:18
Aan: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp: [Nova-Roma] Re: Princeps Senatus

Salvete The Junior Consul is unable to post and has
asked me to forward this to the list.

--- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> Now that m. Octaivius has brought that proposal. I
> really think that the following should be added:
>
> 1. Those who have been Censors should have a better
> chance in being PS.
> 2. It should take 2/3 Senatorial Vote to appoint a
> PS. (since he has the highest auctoritas and
> dignitas it shouldnt be too hard to get).
> 3. Should not be a life time appointment. Thats
> too Imperial for my taste...it should be renewed
> like it did in the old Republic.
>
> Agreements? Disagreements?
>
> Sulla
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] (In)Action & Responsibility
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 16:11:34 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----

>I shall take your word for it that this is what Crowley intended, especially if he himself explained it in this way. My apologies for assuming that it was your interpretation of the English grammar used in his statement that was wrong: I stand corrected, and I see now that it was in fact Crowley's own use of English grammar which was faulty. :)
>
Which is not to say of course that 'To Mega Thehrion MDCLXVI', 'The Logos of the Aion', 'The Ipsissimus' 'Laird of Glenstrae'..... ever felt himself bound to such trivia as consistency, honesty and actually practising what he preached! He would have been using the word Will in the forceful older sense as an 'act of Will', rather than in the modern but a great many of the acts of his particular Will seem to have a lot to do with what he happened to like and feel like!
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] forwarded messages from LC Sulla
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 08:29:31 -0800 (PST)

--- Diana Moravia Aventina <diana@pandora.be> wrote:
> Salve Drusus,
> Each person who joins this list or changes email
> address remains on
> moderated for a few days. This seems to be the rule
> and from what I've seen,
> is implemented in all cases.
> I am happy that after announcing his refusal to pay
> taxes and unsubscribing
> from the main list
> (quite angrily I believe), Lucius Cornelius Sulla
> has had a change of heart
> and has decided to return to us just in time for the
> elections. But this
> rule should be applied to him as well.
>
> I don't believe that forwarding Sulla's emails is
> fair to the new people who
> haven't a compatriot here on the main list to do
> this for them. We are all
> interested in LC Sulla's opinion, and we can all
> wait a few extra hours or
> even days to hear them. I believe that Sulla's
> legacy will not be forgotten
> in a matter of a mere few days.
>
> Vale (and Shalom back)
> Diana Moravia Aventina
>
Salve,
Under ordinary circumstances I don't forward mails.
However right now one of our Praetors has resigned,
and the other is under a heavy Macronational workload.
We have a single scriba handling the majority of the
workload at the current time.

There is also a secondary point regarding modaration.
My belief is that no magistrate should be placed on
modarated status, They have offical duties to perform
and these sometimes require rapid communication.

I Also beleave that no canidate for office should be
placed on modarated status. They have a limited time
to get thier message to the voters and modaration robs
them of some of that time. There is also a very real
potential for an abuse of power if the Praetors happen
to belong to a diferent faction than a canidate. (I
Make no accusation against the current Praetor who is
an honest man)

=====
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!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Candidacy of Marcus Octavius Germanicus
From:	<3s@hsk-net.de>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 10:37:52 -0600 (CST)

Caius Flavius Diocletianus Censor Quiritibus S.P.D.

At the end of the year, our current Senior Censor Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus completes his 2-years term as Censor. Our current senior Consul Marcus Octavius Germanicus candidates for this office.

Marcus Octavius Germanicus served our republic well. He served in a variety of offices, and gained large experiences in our public service. Furthermore, he designed the tools and instruments the Censors use in every-day-work, he manages the database as censorial scribe.

Nobody is more suitable for this magistracy like him. He�s dedicated, kind, able, experienced and the natural choice for this office. He knows what�s to do, he knows the procedures and the legal basics for Censor work.

Citizens, you have the chance to elect the best candidate available in the office of Censor. I know Marcus Octavius well and I�m convinced that we can both cooperate well for the further benefit of our republic. Give him the chance to get this office he deserves, which he can fill out well.

When you cast your votes, vote for Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Candidate for Censor.

Bene Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Censor, Senator
Propraetor Germaniae


Subject:	RE: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 17:47:05 +0100

Salve Sulla,
Glad that you're back.You always have something intelligent and interesting
to contribute.
Vale
Diana Moravia Aventina

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Candidacy fro Tribunus Plebis
From:	"gaiuspopilliuslaenas" <ksterne@bellsouth.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 16:48:50 -0000

Gaius Popillius Laenas Quiritibus salutem plurimam dicit,

I come before you today in the whitened toga to offer my services as
Tribunus Plebis of Nova Roma. I joined Nova Roma in February of
2001 and I am completing a term as Consular Quaestor (selected by
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix). I also serve as Praefectus Regio of
the Magna Flumen regio of America Austrorientalis province.

As Consular Quaestor, with invaluable help from my colleague, Titus
Octavius Pius, and from both Consuls, I was heavily involved in
setting up the system and collecting the taxes for our first year.
This included:

- Devising a system of accounting for tax receipts, transfers,
and other transactions and a separate system allowing for the
sorting of tax data by various criteria (gens, province, etc.). I
will provice these systems to next year's Consular Quaestores along
with any assistance they may need.

- Serving as the physical collection point for payments made by
check, cash, or money order and depositing these in the Nova Roma
main bank account.

- Working with Provincial Governors and private cives to
facilitate the collection of taxes from non-US provinces.

- Securing insurance bonding against any defalcation during the
tax collection and remittance process. I paid the cost of the bond
myself as a donation to Nova Roma.

- Providing the accounting information to the Consuls and Senate
needed for the preparation of next years budget.

My service as Quaestor has been personally rewarding and has made me
feel much more a part of something real. I wish to continue such
service as Tribune. As such I will serve in the traditional roll of
protector of the rights of all cives of our Republic.

I humbly ask for your support and encourage all cives to exercise
their right to vote.

Valete,
Gaius Popillius Laenas
Consular Quaestor
Praefectus Regio Magna Flumen
Paterfamilias Gens Popillia

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 08:51:30 -0800

Avete Omnes,
----- Original Message -----
From: fabia_agoria
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 2:42 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism

<<--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@y...> wrote:
Are you delibertly attempting to stir up hatred between Nova Roma's
citizens? Are you trying to instill hatred towards Pagans among the
Christians that look apon the Religio favorably? Did you ever stop to
think that YOU might be the reason that so many of the Christians you
have met have such a negative view of Pagans?>>

Salve!

I thought Taurinus' post was well-written, but then again, I might be
a little biased.

Sulla: Yes your biased, but thats Ok.
As for your questions about Christianity, well, when I can walk
outside my house and freely discuss my pagan beliefs without fear,
I'll be sure and get back to you on that. I was under the impression
that Christians hate and/or fear Pagans because they are taught to.

Sulla: You mean you cannot do that now? And I must say your impression is not accurate based on my experiences in Nova Roma. Maybe exposure to Nova Roma will broaden your paradigm.

Having said all that, I have no problem with Christians. Most of my
best friends are Christians who fully accept me for who I am.

Sulla: Doesn't this statement run counter to what you posted above that you have given the impression that you cannot walk outside your house and freely discuss your pagan beliefs without fear? I mean if your Xtians friends accept you they should accept your beliefs too.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Vale,

Fabia Agoria

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:	[Nova-Roma] Re: New poll for Roma Nova: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"lithia_cassia" <mscommunication@attbi.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 04:49:42 -0000

As a fellow newbie, I have to say, that is a RELIEF!

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@y...> wrote:
> There is no general acrimony between Christians and
> Pagans in Nova Roma. The Person making the acrimonius
> posts has been a citizen for about 1 week.
>
> I Have been a citizen for allmost 2 years and in all
> that time there was less Religious hostility in Nova
> Roma than than this one new citizen has stirred up in
> a week. You just happened to join at a bad time. This
> hostility over religion is not the norm in Nova Roma.
> (Though I can't say the same for Nova Roman Politics)
>
> Prior to last week the relationship between Christians
> and Pagans was mostly one of mutal respect, and I
> assure you that the vast majority of us still respect
> each others beliefs.
>


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Election Reminder
From:	"lithia_cassia" <mscommunication@attbi.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 04:47:42 -0000

Salve,

Er, this is a general call for help - how do I get a voter code when
the 'get voter code' thing isn't appearing for me? My citizen page
is here: http://www.novaroma.org/bin/view?id=4792. Does anyone else
have this problem?

Thanks

Lithia


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: New poll for Roma Nova: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 04:55:37 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@y...> wrote:

> Salve,
> There is no general acrimony between Christians and
> Pagans in Nova Roma. The Person making the acrimonius
> posts has been a citizen for about 1 week.

He's talking about me; and he is right- there is no acrimony between
religions here. I have been targeted for censorship and persecution
for stating personal opinions and for having opinions that are at
odds with three or four key people here who are quite vocal.

>
> I Have been a citizen for allmost 2 years and in all
> that time there was less Religious hostility in Nova
> Roma than than this one new citizen has stirred up in
> a week. You just happened to join at a bad time. This
> hostility over religion is not the norm in Nova Roma.
> (Though I can't say the same for Nova Roman Politics)

You didn't join at a bad time; you joined at a time when people are
having trouble resolving the idea in their heads that other people
have differing opinions.

> Prior to last week the relationship between Christians
> and Pagans was mostly one of mutal respect, and I
> assure you that the vast majority of us still respect
> each others beliefs.

I have to say, I have no trouble respecting anyone's beliefs. But
history is history- except when history is recounted on this list and
it makes some christians in the past look like bad people. Then
suddenly, it seems, the person who made the post about history is out
to attack and disrespect all christians. I never set out to do any
such thing. I clearly state that I am giving opinions. But that
doesn't seem to be good enough. But I'm not going anywhere, and Iw
will not stop stating my opinions, and stating history when it
relates to some topic that I am exercising my freedom of speech to
bring up here on this list which is listed as being for all things
Roman- history, religion, culture, etc.

G.A. Taurinus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Declaration for Head of the Sodalitas Iuventutis Romanae.
From:	BiggPoppaPump420@aol.com
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 00:08:03 EST

I would like to be voted in as Head of the Sodalitas Iuventutis Romanae.
Please put me in on the ballot. I'm perfectly aware that SIR is not too well
known or even recognized as a Sodalitas, but, that's what I plan on doing.
Thank You

Gaius Cassius Marius

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"fabia_agoria" <artemisiakore@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 10:42:44 -0000

<<--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@y...> wrote:
Are you delibertly attempting to stir up hatred between Nova Roma's
citizens? Are you trying to instill hatred towards Pagans among the
Christians that look apon the Religio favorably? Did you ever stop to
think that YOU might be the reason that so many of the Christians you
have met have such a negative view of Pagans?>>

Salve!

I thought Taurinus' post was well-written, but then again, I might be
a little biased.

As for your questions about Christianity, well, when I can walk
outside my house and freely discuss my pagan beliefs without fear,
I'll be sure and get back to you on that. I was under the impression
that Christians hate and/or fear Pagans because they are taught to.

Besides, even if Taurinus was indeed trying to stir up conflict, that
does not mean that you have to take the bait. ;)

Having said all that, I have no problem with Christians. Most of my
best friends are Christians who fully accept me for who I am.

Vale,

Fabia Agoria

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: New poll for Nova-Roma: Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 02:44:11 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@y...> wrote:
>
> --- g_agorius_taurinus <g_agorius_taurinus@y...>
> wrote:
>
> > before Jesus was even a gleam in Joseph's eye.
> (Along with other inflamitory statements)
>
> You just can't lay off the Christian baiting can you?
>
> Do you have some neurotic need for attention, even if
> it's negative?

Drusus,

I think that you are over-reacting. That statement was not meant
to "bait" anyone. Joseph was Jesus's father. Mary's Husband. It's all
over the bible. He (Joseph) was married to Jesus's mom. That makes
him Jesus's father.

I have heard many theories about jesus's 'real' parentage. I have
that a roman soldier name Panthera was his real father. I have heard
many things. Some people (christian people) think that he was the son
of a ghost or a god.

I am under no obligation, being a non-christian, to act or write as
though I believe that he (jesus) was the son of their god. I choose
to speak of him in the only terms that make any realistic sense- if
he indeed was a historical person- which I have doubts about, as do
many of the unbiased historians in academia- but if I DO choose to
speak of him, I will discuss him and refer to him as Jesus Ben Joseph-
which is who he would have been if he was a real person and if Mary
and Joseph the Carpenter were his parents.

If they want us to think of jesus as an actual historical flesh-and-
blood person, then that means that he had actual historical flesh-and-
blood parents, and not a woman and a "spirit" or a "god". IF they
want to present jesus as a mythological composite figure, part of a
metaphysical myth-reality, and not as a historical person, then I am
totally okay with him being the "son" of a "god". But in no world
will I ever make the claim that the two are one and the same, nor
will I believe it.

I am not going to violate the rules of sense and reason and reality
just because some people here believe this tale that they have been
told that a 'real' man 2000 years ago had no human father. In my
opinion, that is the height of absurdity- an attempt on the part of
ancient relgious power brokers to graft the venerable pagan holy
tradition of godly parentage, with all it's symbolic and metaphorical
power, onto a "real" person that they wanted to set up as the end-
all, be-all of all religions, and then claim exclusive rights to him,
and thus to all 'genuine spirituality'.

It's an age old religious-turned-political maneuver of evangelical
absolutism- and I am not a part of it, and I am sure that the pagans
here don't want to be a part of it either.

But all of that aside- I think that you are taking what I said WAY
too harshly. I have no need for attention, at all. A pagan expressing
viewpoints that don't pander to christian sensibilities should not be
accused of "seeking attention" at the e-list of a pagan
reconstructionist society. He should also not be compared to the REAL
zealots that would rather see all of us dead than practising the
Religio.

But that seems to be happening; and I notice, mostly it's you that
does it. If I am so offensive to you, I think that perhaps you should
question why. I also think that ignoring me and my posts would be the
best option for you, and for the peace and harmony of this list. I
don't mean to offend you; but it is impossible not to offend someone
who is seeking to be offended, or who has their sensitivity knob
turned WAY up.

G.A. Taurinus

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 06:06:11 -0800

Avete Omnes,

I disagree with my colleague. Every year since Nova Roma's existence this problem has cropped up. I think it behooves our Pontiffs and citizens in general to have swift and decisive action. If we do not keep the pressure up on the CP it will not be resolved. Remember citizens it took them over a YEAR to decide on a calendar (mind you not even to change the calendar just to decide). If the Pontiffs want to keep the confidence and support of the citizens at large they should act.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Marcus Octavius Germanicus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS

Salve Luci Sicini,

> The Leges need to be carefuly reviewed by the citizens
> before they are voted on. The Canidates postions need
> to be reviewed. The Blasphemy issuse needs to be
> carefuly considered.

As the "Blasphemy" issue may require a Constitutional change,
and as we are awaiting a recommendation from the Collegium
Pontificum, I respectfully submit that it is an issue for
next year's magistrates. With two months remaining in
the current administration, there just isn't time for
major changes to the Constitution to be given appropriate
consideration.

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Candidate for Censor 2756:
http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/

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]

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Voting
From:	"mjk" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:51:24 -0700

Salvete omnes,

Does Nova Roma have any mechanism for voting by proxy (having someone else vote for you) or an earlier time frame to cast a vote if one is away from the net for the actual election time frame? Thank you.

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Scriba Praefecti

AFRICA SEPTENTRIONALIS
http://www.geocities.com/africa_septentrionalis/index.html

PAX ROMANA

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] forwarded messages from LC Sulla
From:	labienus@novaroma.org
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 10:58:18 US/Central

Salvete

> My belief is that no magistrate should be placed on
> modarated status...
>
> I Also beleave that no canidate for office should be
> placed on modarated status.

I agree entirely with both points. Cornelius Consul is no longer on moderated
status, and I shall ensure that no candidate for office is moderated when I get
home tonight.

Unfortunately, Yahoo did not inform me when Cornelius Consul left and rejoined
the list, which is my fault; I did not think to reset my moderator settings
when my collega resigned. Had I been aware of his situation sooner, he would
have been unmoderated sooner.

> There is also a very real potential for an abuse of power
> if the Praetors happen to belong to a diferent faction than
> a canidate.

I agree. The list moderators must be neutral in the pursuit of their job.
Oversight by others goes a long way to ensure that they are.

> (I Make no accusation against the current Praetor who is an honest man)

Multas gratias tibi ago, mi Druse.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Election Reminder
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:00:42 -0600 (CST)

Salve Lithia Cassia,

You're new... you haven't been assigned one yet. But you will get
one, before the election starts. If your Tribe or Century is
currently showing as zero, this will also be fixed.

Vale, Octavius.

> Salve,
>
> Er, this is a general call for help - how do I get a voter code when
> the 'get voter code' thing isn't appearing for me? My citizen page
> is here: http://www.novaroma.org/bin/view?id=4792. Does anyone else
> have this problem?
>
> Thanks
>
> Lithia
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Candidate for Censor 2756:
http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Voting
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:01:33 -0600 (CST)

Salve Quinte Lani,

> Does Nova Roma have any mechanism for voting by proxy (having someone else
> vote for you) or an earlier time frame to cast a vote if one is away
> from the net for the actual election time frame? Thank you.

Give your voter code - and instructions - to a trusted friend.

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Candidate for Censor 2756:
http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Agreeing to Disagree: Religion discussion Part 2532
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 18:18:44 +0100

Salvete citizens,

At the risk of making everyone on both sides of this discussion angry with
me, I would like to say that this religion theme became counter productive
days ago. The tension of this discussion is just oozing from my monitor....

I know from experience that it is not nearly as fun to take a hot discussion
off list. there is no more audience and personal (albeit by email)
confrontation is difficult for most people. So how about the interested
parties making thier own temporary Yahoo list and discuss it there? Then you
can publicly slug it out (figuatively speaking of course) while not
upsetting other people.

Or better yet, just agree to disagree and drop the subject entirely!

Thank you for your patience.
Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] *VENATIONES* >Financial situation<
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <mcserapio@yahoo.it>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:20:53 -0000

AVETE OMNES

The combats approaches! Before starting let's take a look to the
financial situation of all those who joined the Venationes in the
past or the actual edition.

First of all, I have to make an announcement. At the end of last
Venationes, one of the participants, Aedilis Plebis Marcus Scribonius
Curio Britannicus, had an official proclamation published on the Ludi
website (you can find it at
http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/proclam.html). He annonced that he
would donate his residual sestertii (1,500) to the first citizen who
joined the actual edition of the venationes.
The first citizen who joined this edition of the venationes is
Ambrosius Silvanus Virbius, which receive Britannicus' 1,500
Sestertii!!! (lucky guy!).

Here below you find the complete list of the citizens:

- Quinctus Quinctilius Varus Galili - S 8,833
- Gaius Cornelius Ahenobarbus - S 8,333
- Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus S 0
- Marcus Apulus Caesar - S 8,333
- Sextus Apollonius Scipio - S 17,666
- Patricia Cassia - S 8,833
- Tiberius Annaeus Otho - S 5,833
- Franciscus Apulus Caesar - S 6,333
- Caeso Fabius Quintilianus - S 15,666
- Tiberius Ullerius Faber - S 2,500
- Lucius Arminius Faustus - S 48,000
- Artorius Arius Sarmaticus - S 6,833
- Amulius Equitius Germanicus - S500
- Tiberus Popillius Iulianus - S5,500
- Caius Rubellius Rufus - S 8,333
- Claudius Iulius Claudianus - S 8,833
- Marcus Iulius Perusianus - S 0
- Tiberius Claudius Lucentius Vindex - S 10,333
- Roscia Annaea Pia - S 5,833
- Salix Galaicus - S 17,666
- Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix - S 8,333
- Prima Rutilia Nocta - S 2,500
- Diana moravia Aventina - S 0
- Raina Cornelia Aeterna - S 2,500
- Marcus Octavius Germanicus - S 3,000
- Ambrosius Silvanus Virbius - S 2,500 + S 1,500
- Lucius Aulus Octavianus - S 1,000
- Titus Arminius Genialis - S 4,500

OPTIME VALETE
MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO
***Candidate for Quaestor***
Scriba Aedilis Plebis (Ti.Apo.Cicatrix)


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] *VENATIONES* Assigning strength and resistance points
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <mcserapio@yahoo.it>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:23:22 -0000

AVETE OMNES

This message is for those who took part to past edition of the
Venationes: your fighters trained a lot, and finally they are
stronger than before, ready to combat again, and to defeat new
ravenous enemies!

Now let's see how many strength and resistance points did they get!

LVDVS MATVTINVS: (+15 points)

>>Quinctus Quinctilius Varus Galili
Baccibus:
was: str36-res31
now: str43-res39

>>Patricia Cassia
Aquila:
was: str30-res40
now str34-res51

>>Franciscus Apulus caesar
Aurum:
was: str35-res32
now: str47-res35

>>Claudius Iulius Claudianus
Licentiosus:
was: str39-res26
now: str42-res38

>>Tiberius Claudius Lucentius Vindex
Callimorius:
was: str28-res18
now: str33-res28

>>Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix
Entinus:
was: str29-res27
now: str31-res40

LVDVS LEONTINVM (+13 points)

>>Sextus Apollonius Scipio
Crispinus:
was: str30-res28
now: str35-res36

>>Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Dania:
was: str32-res31
now: str34-res42

>>Salix Galaicus
Astacius:
was: str31-res21
now: str31-res34

LVDVS TAVRISCVM (+11 points)

>>Lucius Arminius Faustus
Aquinca:
was: str38-res30
now: str42-res37

LVDVS PENTASIVM (+8 points)

>>Gaius Cornelius Ahenobarbus
Invictus:
was: str45-res32
now: str48-res37

>>Marcus Apulus Caesar
Afer:
was: str38-res38
now: str42-res42

>>Tiberius Annaeus Otho
Tingis:
was: str39-res38
now: str46-res39

>>Artorius Arius Sarmaticus
Victor:
was: str43-res33
now: str49-res35

>>Caius Rubellius Rufus
Mamertinus:
was: str36-res44
now: str39-res49

>>Roscia Annaea Pia
Purpureus:
was: str36-res39
now: str41-res42

BENE VALETE
MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO
***Candidate for Quaestor***
Scriba Aedilis Plebis (Ti.Apo.Cicatrix)


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Princeps Senatus
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 11:27:37 -0600 (CST)

Salvete Quirites,

A few days ago, I stated my intention to nominate Marcus Minucius Audens
as Princeps Senatus. I continue to believe he is the ideal candidate.

Several Senators did point out that it would be more appropriate to
create the position first, before nominating anyone to it. After
some negotiation, we have arrived at a description of this position
and its qualifications, and will be voting on it this weekend.

Here is the proposed definition of Princeps Senatus:

I. The position of Princeps Senatus is hereby created.

II. The priviliges of the Princeps Senatus are as follows:

A. The right to use the title "Princeps Senatus" in communications;

B. A notation of "Princeps Senatus" status in the Album Civium,
Album Senatorium, Annales, and other relevant pages on the web site;

C. To be considered first in seniority among Senators not currently
holding the offices of Censor, Consul, or Praetor, as an amendment
to Section IV.B.1. of the Senatus Consultum de Ratione Senatus.

III. The qualifications of any candidate nominated for appointment as
Princeps Senatus are as follows:

A. The candidate must be at or above the median age of Senators,
unless that candidate has previously served a full term as Censor,
in which case the age requirement shall not apply;

B. and, the candidate must have served as a Senator for a length of
time equal to or greater than the median;

C. and, the candidate must have served a full term as Consul;

D. and, the candidate must be a Patrician at the time of his
nomination;

E. and, the candidate must be, in the opinions of his fellow
Senators, of the highest moral character, dignitas and auctoritas.

IV. The title of Princeps Senatus is granted by Senatus Consultum.
A qualifying candidate is nominated by the proposal of a
Senatus Consultum naming that person Princeps Senatus; if
two-thirds of the votes on that Senatus Consultum are
affirmative,that Senator then becomes Princeps Senatus.

A. Should no suitable candidate be available, or no proposed
Senatus Consultum nominating a candidate be made, the position
will remain vacant until a suitable candidate is proposed.

V. The tenure of a Princeps Senatus is for five years. It may be
terminated prematurely only by death, by a complete cessation of
communications lasting one year or more, by termination of
citizenship, or by resignation or ejection from the Senate.

-

Valete, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Candidate for Censor 2756:
http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/

Community email addresses:
Post message: SenatusRomanus@onelist.com
Subscribe: SenatusRomanus-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: SenatusRomanus-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: SenatusRomanus-owner@onelist.com

Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/SenatusRomanus

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] *VENATIONES* Calendar of the combats
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <mcserapio@yahoo.it>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:26:17 -0000

AVETE OMNES

Well! We are ready! Now you will find out which animal (or animals?)
your fighter will combat against and when!!!

>>NOVEMBER 5TH<<

-Artorius Arius Sarmaticus
VICTOR (str49-res45) will fight against a TIGER (str42-res34) which
already killed a man!

-Franciscus Apulus Caesar
AVRVM (str47-res35) shall try to defeat an African ELEPHANT (str20-
res62).

-Salix Galaicus
ASTACIVS (str31-res34) will have to face... TWO PANTHERS! (str32-
res39 and str30-res33). Not an easy task!

>>NOVEMBER 6TH<<

-Diana Moravia Aventina
LATINA (str44-res36) will combat against a ravenous LION (str40-
res39) caught in Numidia. Be careful Diana: this nice friend already
ate a fighter during past Venationes, but he is hungry again...

>>NOVEMBER 7TH<<

-Tiberius Claudius Lucentius Vindex
CALLIMORIVS (str33-res28) shall face a BULL (str40-res41).

>>NOVEMBER 8TH<<

- Sextus Apollonius Scipio
CRISPINVS (str35-res36) will fight against a new TIGER (str38-res47).

- Lucius Aulus Octavianus
MEMOR (str45-res35) shall face an ELEPHANT (str22-res60).

The we will have a short pause in order to allow me to take part to a
Nova Roma meeting in Provincia Italia. ;-)

>>NOVEMBER 11TH<<

-Lucius Arminius Faustus
AQVINCA (str42-res37) has a very hard task... He will fight against
THREE BUFFALOS!!! (str16-res23, str30-res18 and str28-res20) Good
luck, my friend!

>>NOVEMBER 12TH<<

- Prima Rutilia Nocta
PRODROMVS (str30-res30) is a new entry in the venationes, and he will
already have a strong foe: a RHINOCEROS! (str46-res48)

>>NOVEMBER 13TH<<

- Marcus Octavius Germanicus
DEMETRIVS (str31-res29) shall try do defeat TWO BEARS (str30-res32
and str34-res33).

>>NOVEMBER 14TH<<

- Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
DANIA (str34-res42) will have to fight against a PANTHER (str40-
res39).

- Raina Cornelia Aeternia
PROTERVA (str29-res31) shall face a BUFFALO (str30-res38).

>>NOVEMBER 15TH<<

- Tiberius Annaeus Otho
TINGIS (str46-res39) will have to fight against... a HIPPOPOTAMUS!
(str30-res33) Don't be too calm, Tiberi. They *seem* to be peaceful
animals!

- Titus Arminius Genialis
LONCHVS (str28-res24) will combat against a RHINOCEROS (str49-res37)
wich already killed a fighter during past Venationes!

>>NOVEMBER 16TH<< >>VENATIO MAGNA<<

-Roscia Annaea Pia - PVRPVREVS (str41-res42)
-Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix - ENTINVS (str31-res40)
-Ambrosius Silvanus Virbius - IDAEA (str28-res32)

These three brave fighters will enter the Circus Flaminius filled
with water, and will combat walking on ships and planks against TEN
CROCODILES!!!!!!!
1st crocodile - str20-res30
2nd cr. - str16-res25
3rd cr. - str20-res21
4th cr. - str19-res25
5th cr. - str24-res18
6th cr. - str31-res38
7th cr. - str33-res22
8th cr. - str26-res19
9th cr. - str22-res20
10th cr. - str33-res37

This is a very difficult combat. Every winner (if any) will receive
an additional S5,000 award.

I remind you that all these informations can also be found on the
Venationes website at http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/venat.html

Well, now we are really ready! Tomorrow the first combats!!!!!!
Enjoy the Venationes! Enjoy the Ludi Plebei!

OPTIME VALETE
MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO
***Candidate for Quaestor***
Scriba Aedilis Plebis (Ti.Apo.Cicatrix)


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] *LAW CASE CONTEST* Rules
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <mcserapio@yahoo.it>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:32:36 -0000

AVETE OMNES

This is a contest for those of you who want to test their skills in
law!

You do not need to be a lawyer, nor to study Roman law. Just read the
cases we will propose. The are _real_ cases taken from Roman history
and judged by Roman jurists!

Four cases will be published today in my next message.
You have to carefully read the texts, examinate the cases, analyze
several main points, and formulate your judgement with the
explanation.

You are not required to judge all four cases. You can also judge only
one, it does not matter.

Your judgements and explanations have to be sent to
mcserapio@yahoo.it within November 12th. Remember to put "LAW" in the
subject line. Also specify in your message the number which indicates
the case you are judging.

Your judgements will be examinated considering both the judgements
given by the Roman jurists (Proculus, Promponius and Marcellus) and
your explanations.

With each case you can get up to 10 points.
On 17th November we will publish the original judgements given by the
Roman jurists and the results of the Law Contest. We will have a
winner for each case and a Big Winner, considering the sum of the
points. That's why we strongly suggest you to judge all four case!
However, as previously said, it is not compulsory.

Enjoy the Law Contest! Enjoy the Ludi Plebei!

OPTIME VALETE
MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO
***Candidate for Quaestor***
Scriba Aedilis Plebis Cicatricis
Legatvs Externis Rebvs Provinciae Italiae
Dominvs Praefectvs Sodalitatis Egressvs
Scriba Translationvm Primvs Academiae Thvles
------------------------
VISIT MY WEBSITE
http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/Serapio_for_Quaestor.html


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] *LAW CASE CONTEST* The Cases!!!
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <mcserapio@yahoo.it>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:41:40 -0000

AVETE OMNES

Well, here below you can find the four cases we propose you for the
Law case Contest.

While examinating each case, always consider the following questions
to guide your analysis:

1-Who was the negligent party?

2-Were there any extenuating circumstances?

3-Who had the most to gain or lose from the suit?

An now....

THE CASES:

CASE #1: The Barber
"While several persons are playing ball, the ball having been struck
too violently it should hit the hand of barber who is shaving a slave
at the time, in such a way that the throat of the latter is cut by
the razor, the party responsible for negligence is liable under the
Lex Aquila."

Is the barber responsible for injury to someone he is shaving in a
location where it is customary to play ball or is it the
responsibility of the customer to place himself in a safe position?

--------------------------------

CASE #2: Mules and Wagons
"Mules were hauling two loaded wagons up the Capitoline Hill, and the
drivers were pushing the first wagon, which was inclined to one side,
in order that the mules might haul it more easily. In the meantime
the upper wagon began to go back, and as the drivers were caught
between the two wagons they jumped out of the way and the last wagon
was struck by the first. The second wagon then moved back, crushing a
slave boy who belonged to someone."

Are the men responsible to the owner of the slave for dangerous
action and driving of wagons or is the owner of the mules responsible
for owning and using unstable and fractious mules?

--------------------------

CASE #3: Hogs and Wolves
"Wolves carried away some hogs from my shepherds; the tenant of an
adjoining farm, having pursued the wolves with strong and powerful
dogs, which he kept for the protection of his flocks, took the hogs
away from the wolves. . . . [The] shepherd claimed the hogs."

Are the hogs the legal property of the shepherd who saved them or are
they still the rightful property of their original owners?

-------------------

CASE #4: Jewels--the Will, and the Heir
"I gave pearls and gold to Antonia Tertylla. She afterwards took
possession of the jewels and then died without the valuables being
listed in her will. Her heir converted the pearls and gold into a
necklace for her own use. I asked if these valuables, since they were
not in their original form, had been added to, were not listed in the
will, and did not belong to the heir should be returned to me."

Do the jewels belong to the gift giver because they were not listed
in the will or are all properties owned by Antonia now possessions of
her heir?

-----------------------

Well, that's all. Enjoy the Law Case Contest!!!!!
Enjoy the Ludi Plebei!!!

OPTIME VALETE
MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO
***Candidate for Quaestor***
Scriba Aedilis Plebis (Ti.Apo.Cicatrix)
Dominvs Praefectvs Sodalitatis egressvs
Legatvs Externis Rebvs provinciae Italiae
Scriba Translationvm Primvs Academiae Thvles
---------------------
VISIT MY WEBSITE
http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/Serapio_for_Quaestor.html
AFRICA SEPTENTRIONALIS
http://www.geocities.com/africa_septentrionalis/index.html
GENS CONSTANTINIA
http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/constantinia-en.html

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

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


Subject:	RE: [Nova-Roma] "Princeps Senatus" and Concordia
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 18:54:25 +0100

Salve,

I would like to add my vote of support to any honor that is awarded to
Marcus Minucius Audens. Besides the long long list of personal
accomplishments, he has been an asset to Nova Roma more times that anyone
can count. He is a true gentleman and deserves our utmost respect and
friendship. I wonder what Nova Roma would be like today if we hadn't been
lucky enough to have Marcus Minusius Audens as a citizen.
Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina

>On November 1st, I will ask the Senate to grant Senator Audens
>the honorary title of "Princeps Senatus", or First Senator.

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

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Declaration for Head of the Sodalitas Iuventutis Romanae.
From:	"Manius Constantinus Serapio" <mcserapio@yahoo.it>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 18:19:44 -0000

AVE GAI CASSI MARI

> I would like to be voted in as Head of the Sodalitas Iuventutis
Romanae.
> Please put me in on the ballot. I'm perfectly aware that SIR is not
too well
> known or even recognized as a Sodalitas, but, that's what I plan on
doing.

I really appreciate your willingness to dedicate your time to the
Societas (not Sodalitas yet) Iuventutis Romanae.
However, I must inform you that the officers of the SIR are not
elected by the Comitia.

Illustris Caeso Fabius Quintilianus has been given the task by
Consul Marcus Octavius Germanicus to organize such a group as a
Sodalitas, and it is what he is actually doing. As you probably know
he is studying on several books in order to form a group which should
have the features of both the Scouting and the Roman exercitus.

However, it doesn't means that we wouldn't appreciate your
collaboration! We really are not that kind of people! On the
contrary, we would welcome your help in this area which need to be
developed!

For any information, please, feel free to contact me at
mcserapio@yahoo.it!

OPTIME VALE
MANIVS-CONSTANTINVS-SERAPIO
***Candidate for Quaestor***
Scriba Arenae et Sermonis Societatis Ivventvtis Romanae
http://www.geocities.com/nr_sir/index.html
----------------------------
VISIT MY WEBSITE
http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/Serapio_for_Quaestor.html

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: The Eagle Newsletter
From:	"Christopher L. Wood"
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 13:38:12 -0500

I would be willing to edit and write articles for the Eagle if the Curator
Differum starts it up again. It should be one of the "benefits" of joining
Nova Roma.

Ti. Ambrosius Silvus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Religion discussion Part 2532
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 17:27:58 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@p...> wrote:
> Salvete citizens,
>
> At the risk of making everyone on both sides of this discussion
angry with
> me, I would like to say that this religion theme became counter
productive
> days ago. The tension of this discussion is just oozing from my
monitor....

Outward tension is a sign of latent tension. Tension just doesn't
come from nowhere. If it can emerge in such large amounts in a
discussion like this, that means that it was always there, albeit in
a hidden, sleeping form. This discussion, which began innocently
enough, has only become the means by which a greater pressure is
being released.

And sometimes, blessed Diana, that is a good thing. I think that you
are feeling perhaps too much tension, just by being an observer,
because several of my opponents in this debate tend to be quite vocal
and tend to take things VERY personally. They have a way of writing
that over-exagerates what is really taking place here- and I don't
think that this is a completely unintentional thing. The more people
that become convinced that this conversation is somehow dangerous or
destructive to Nova Roma (which it isn't), the more people will
complain.

Now, Diana, I'm not trying to say that you are complaining. I know
what you are feeling. All I ever wanted to do was to express an
opinion- and it's not just my opinion, but the thoughts and feelings
of quite a few- but I was villified for doing so.

I would have stopped long ago, but my somewhat determined opponent
Drusus seems to want this to continue, or he wouldn't continually
post provocative letters. Even when he doesn't say my name, I can see
the insults, as can the mass of the people who write to me in private
consoling me about it and encouraging me to continue on.

If Drusus and his faction would let my opinion be my opinion, and
drop this, then so would I.

Vale,

G.A. Taurinus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	Artemisia <artemisiakore@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:43:49 -0800 (PST)

Salve!

<<--- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
wrote: Yes your biased, but thats Ok.>>

Thanks. I can admit it.

<<You mean you cannot do that now? And I must say
your impression is not accurate based on my
experiences in Nova Roma. Maybe exposure to Nova Roma
will broaden your paradigm.>>

Well I was speaking in terms of actual life
experience. I haven't been here in Nova Roma long
enough to make an evaluation.

<<Doesn't this statement run counter to what you
posted above that you have given the impression that
you cannot walk outside your house and freely discuss
your pagan beliefs without fear?>>

Good question. The answer is no, I did not contradict
myself. I'm speaking of a case-by-case basis. In a
general sense, the area of the US in which I live is
not tolerant of anyone's beliefs but the beliefs of
Christianity. I can give you some documented examples
as well as personal experiences if you like, but I
think that might run into an off-topic area. However,
my close friends are indeed accepting of my beliefs. I
would not associate with them if they weren't.

Vale,
Fabia Agoria

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Religion discussion Part 2532
From:	cassius622@aol.com
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:05:18 EST

Outward tension is a sign of latent tension. Tension just doesn't
> come from nowhere. If it can emerge in such large amounts in a
> discussion like this, that means that it was always there, albeit in
> a hidden, sleeping form. This discussion, which began innocently
> enough, has only become the means by which a greater pressure is
> being released.

Cassius:
Ah! So by continuing to feed a stressful situation, you're really helping to
relieve the underlying tension in Nova Roma! I must say that the effort is
very successful indeed... we just lost another Citizen over this debate. (She
quietly gave notice to the Censors rather than posting to the list.) I guess
this means a little more 'tension' has just slipped away.

If there are any Citizens left at the end of this 'relieving tension over
religion', will the debate move on to politics so that we may get rid of the
any *other* tensions (and people) that might still remain?

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Religion discussion Part 2532
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 12:09:10 -0800 (PST)

--- g_agorius_taurinus <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
wrote:

SNIP

> I would have stopped long ago, but my somewhat
> determined opponent
> Drusus seems to want this to continue, or he
> wouldn't continually
> post provocative letters. Even when he doesn't say
> my name, I can see
> the insults, as can the mass of the people who write
> to me in private
> consoling me about it and encouraging me to continue
> on.
>
> If Drusus and his faction would let my opinion be my
> opinion, and
> drop this, then so would I.
>
>
> Vale,
>
> G.A. Taurinus

Oh Give it a break,

You have posted offensive remarks directed at the
faith of other Nova Romans. Most of these were snide
comments that were not nessacary for the point you
were trying to make. You have posted comments favoring
the persucations of Christians.

Freedom of Speach does not include a moral blank
check. Others judge you by the words you post, and if
they find them moraly offensive they have the right to
say so.

If you want to comment that the Christians are
mistaken in thier belief system, fine. That is not
offensive. When you start dragging in "gleam in the
eye" comments all you are doing is offering insults
with no reason.

As for my reasons for speaking out on this matter they
are summed up in a quote from a Christian Pastor.

"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a
Communist, so I said nothing.

Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not
a Social Democrat, so I did nothing.

Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade
unionist.

And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew,
so I did little.

Then when they came for me, there was no one left to
stand up for me."
(Martin Niem�ller)

=====
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!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Religion discussion Part 2532
From:	"Gnaeus Equitius Marinus" <equitius_marinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 20:14:21 -0000

Taurinus writes:

> I can see
> the insults, as can the mass of the people who write to me in
> private consoling me about it and encouraging me to continue on.

Ah, the lurkers support you in e-mail...

While this is all very entertaining, and I for one enjoy a fine farce
as much as any Roman, I do think you're skating on thin ice Taurinus.
I'm also sure you'll disregard that warning, given your conduct to
date. But that's your choice.

L. Sicinus Drusus is an honest and honorable man. I've had occassion
to disagree with his views in the past, but never with his ethics. If
he has been harsh with you in his replies, I consider it the
consequence of your own unwillingness to accept the well intended
advice you've been offered from many.

You are new here. You don't know us, and you're doing very little to
gain anyone's respect. From where I observe you show all the traits
of the combative clueless newbie, an all too common species on the
net. While your information may be correct, and indeed I've no
quarrel with the factual information you've provided, your
presentation and your manners are those of a boor and a lout. Even
the most accepting people here grow weary of you. You should (though
you will not, I expect) study more and say less for a while.

-- Marinus

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Citizens leaving
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 20:17:36 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., cassius622@a... wrote:
> Cassius:

> Ah! So by continuing to feed a stressful situation, you're really
helping to
> relieve the underlying tension in Nova Roma! I must say that the
effort is
> very successful indeed... we just lost another Citizen over this
debate. (She
> quietly gave notice to the Censors rather than posting to the
list.) I guess
> this means a little more 'tension' has just slipped away.

How funny you should mention that- That Citizen privately E-mailed me
before she left. She was a friend of mine; she told me that she left
in disgust at how Drusus was treating me, and at the nature of his
public posts, and how nothing was being done to address his public
insults and hostility. She felt that Nova Roma was not the place it
was purporting to be, especially not for pagans.

G.A. Taurinus

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: For Drusus
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 20:23:11 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@y...> wrote:
>
> Oh Give it a break,

I'd love to.

> You have posted comments favoring
> the persucations of Christians.

No, I have not. I never made a comment favoring the persecution of
christians here at Nova Roma. All I did was share the reasons why
ancient Rome persecuted christians- you are the one that decided that
this meant that I was "for persecuting" christians. Also, people here
did the EXACT same thing back to me, by glorifying emperors that
persecuted pagans, as "examples of roman dignity and virtue".

> Freedom of Speach does not include a moral blank
> check.

"Freedom of SPEECH" doesn't have anything to do with morals. It has
to do with expression. Leave my morals to me, and I'll leave yours to
you.

> As for my reasons for speaking out on this matter they
> are summed up in a quote from a Christian Pastor.
>
> "First they came for the Communists, but I was not a
> Communist, so I said nothing.

You seem to favor this "persecution complex" a good bit. I can assure
you that I am not a national socialist party that has come to Nova
Roma to herd all dissenters into concentration camps. You like to
make me out as such, and you use serious, heavy handed quotes like
that one above to make people think that you have some serious cause
here, when all that is really happening is that you don't like my
opinions, and you can't stand it that I have the right to post them
without being harrassed.

I want peace on this list. Are you ready to stop now?

G.A. Taurinus

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Action & Responsibility
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <pectus_roboreus1@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:41:49 -0500

On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 07:00:28PM +0000, Jamie Johnston wrote:

Salve, Jamie (do you have a Roman name?), and my apologies for not
responding sooner; I was out of town, and net.incommunicado for the last
two days.

> C. Minucius Scaevola wrote:
>
> > Surely, then, your own inaction in not committing every single second of
> > your life to fighting for world peace makes you responsible for all the
> > deaths that would not have occurred otherwise? In, say, fifty years of
> > concerted effort, surely you would have saved at least one life, and
> > very likely more. Shouldn't your inaction count legally as the action of
> > murder?
>
> Well, there are three issues here that I can see at first glance. One
> is whether inaction counts as action.

If it does, then the above makes you morally liable as stated.

> The second is whether
> consequently responsibility can be assigned for the results of
> inaction.

If the first is true, the second follows.

> Thirdly, whether failing to prevent something carries the
> same degree of moral culpability as causing the thing to occur.

This would have to be on a case-by-case basis, obviously... which does
not work well with any legal system of which I'm aware.

> You
> also raise the equivalent question of legal culpability, but I hope
> you will permit me simply to state that I don't consider the purpose
> of law to be to enforce morality, and therefore I'm content to let
> that particular issue lie outside my contribution to this discussion.

This is one of *the* key issues, as I see it, and cannot be laid aside
or even flung aside; "except for *that* little incident, Mrs. Lincoln,
what did you think of the play?" doesn't work.

> On the first issue, as I've made clear, I think that inaction is
> action, and choosing not to act is a choice, and choosing not to
> choose is the same as choosing not to act.

In that case, I must ask how you morally justify your responsibility for
all those deaths?

> On the second issue, I have a less fully formed view, but I feel
> inclined to accept the implication of Prof. Chomsky's quotation (the
> one that started this discussion) that one is responsible for the
> predictable consequences of one's inaction.

There, I may _cautiously_ agree with you, if "predictable" is defined as
"predictable by a normally prudent person" and includes a test of normal
capabilities. Note that this automatically puts it outside the scope of
any legal system that is applicable here, in Nova Roma. This *is*
something that puts it outside my field of interest here; if, to you,
this issue merits further discussion simply because of its philosophical
merits (and I will grant that it certainly posesses those), I'm afraid
that you'll have to find someone else to engage you.

[ Snip ]

> For the execution of a prisoner on
> death row in the United States whose case I had read about, I am to a
> very slight degree responsible, because I was aware of it, and I could
> have prevented it; but the responsibility is only very slight, because
> I would have had to either mount a successful appeal, which would be
> extremely difficult and unlikely to succeed as I am not a lawyer, I
> live in the U.K., I cannot readily afford to travel to the States, and
> it would in any case probably be too short notice for an appeal, or
> else I could travel to the States (see above difficulties) and attempt
> to illegally free the prisoner from jail and help him or her escape to
> somewhere whence he or she could not be extradited. Assuming the
> prison to have reasonable security, this too I would find very
> difficult. Moreover, if I supported the death penalty (which I do not)
> and believed the person guilty, then I might be willing to accept that
> small amount of responsibility as the price for seeing the sentence
> carried out.

The major difference, as I see it, is that once you _are_ responsible,
and the law _does_ take cognizance of the fact, then you _must_ be
punished according to the measure. There does not seem to be any space
in the above discussion to afford the /de minimis non curat lex/
principle; you're either responsible, to whatever degree, or you're not.

> > I suggest putting on heavy gloves before digging any further into this
> > topic, and thorough disinfection afterwards. It smells to high heaven.
>
> As you can see, my gloves are well strapped on, and I'm prepared to
> wade through as much muck as I need to to have this interesting and
> important debate.

Beyond the above response, I don't see the point. If it's not applicable
here, it's purely of academic interest - and, much as I normally enjoy
bull sessions, my NR-specific time is limited and subject to a number of
commitments. It's possible that someone else may find this of interest.

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Audentes fortuna iuvat.
Fortune favours the brave.
-- Vergil, "Aenis"


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 20:58:55 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : �L. Cornelius Sulla� <alexious@earthlink.net>

> As for your questions about Christianity, well, when I can walk
> outside my house and freely discuss my pagan beliefs without fear,
> I'll be sure and get back to you on that. I was under the impression
> that Christians hate and/or fear Pagans because they are taught to.
>
I can assure you that there are many places where Christians too cannot walk freely outside their house or reveal their beliefs and their political implications in safety. Only yesterday a Catholic man was found beaten with nailed baseball bats and nailed to a fence too near to a Protestant area. Somehow any amount of e-vituperation fails to match up to real danger.
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: For Marinus
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 20:30:21 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "Gnaeus Equitius Marinus"
<equitius_marinus@y...> wrote:

> Ah, the lurkers support you in e-mail...

And some support me in public.

> While this is all very entertaining, and I for one enjoy a fine
farce
> as much as any Roman, I do think you're skating on thin ice
Taurinus.

So now I am a farce, am I? The ice looks fine to me, as much as you
would like me to think that it is thin. And that even sounds like a
threat- and if you think you have the right to make threats, you are
the one that will be in thin ice soon.

> I'm also sure you'll disregard that warning, given your conduct to
> date. But that's your choice.

I have acted according to my heart and conscience. I am under no
obligation to make my "conduct" adhere to your approval, just as you
are under no obligation to do so for me. You have opened this letter
with insults, and you continue to insult me- showing what I consider
to be a lack of dignity.

> L. Sicinus Drusus is an honest and honorable man. I've had
occassion
> to disagree with his views in the past, but never with his ethics.

He has not acted honorable to me- he has shown nothing but intolerace
and hot-headedness, and he even tried to unlawfully ban me from his
province. Do all of your "ethical" friends try to break the laws when
they get angry at a person who has a different opinion?

If
> he has been harsh with you in his replies, I consider it the
> consequence of your own unwillingness to accept the well intended
> advice you've been offered from many.

Go ahead and do all the mental gymnastics and apologetics you have to
to excuse his behavior- it doesn't change a thing.

> You are new here. You don't know us, and you're doing very little
to
> gain anyone's respect.

That's because I don't alter my opinions and beliefs just to get
people's "respect". I am true to myself, and people can respect that
or not, I care little. I give respect to those who give it in turn.
You and Drusus and your sympathy-mates have done nothing to merit my
respect.

> From where I observe you show all the traits
> of the combative clueless newbie,

Your lack of dignity is again shown with these ad hominem attacks.

an all too common species on the
> net. While your information may be correct, and indeed I've no
> quarrel with the factual information you've provided, your
> presentation and your manners are those of a boor and a lout.

boor and lout.... more ad hominem attacks...is this how you go about
gaining people's respect?

Goodbye, Marinus

G.A.T.


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: For Drusus
From:	"Paul Kershaw" <brighn@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:59:54 -0500

Valete,

Drusus wrote:
> You have posted comments favoring the persucations of Christians.

Taurinus replied:
No, I have not. I never made a comment favoring the persecution of
christians here at Nova Roma.

My response to Taurinus:
I humbly suggest that Drusus is selectively characterizing your comments,
and you are responding with subterfuge. The substance of Drusus' comment
here is irrefutable. In post #3919, Taurinus, you wrote:

"I have already explained, at length, why the christians were being
persecuted. They were breaking the law. <other reasons clipped for brevity>
They deserved to have their freedoms taken away; all people
who want to force others to conform to THEIR religion and their ideas
need to be stopped."

I cannot see how you can deny that these words condone the persecution of
early First Millenium Christians by the Roman Empire. Whether Drusus, or
others, implied (or inferred) that you were suggesting a similar modern
persecution is moot; Drusus does not make that accusation overt. On the
other hand, there *are* modern Christians (Rev. Falwell, for instance, and
Ann Coulter, to name two) who have made public comments about wanting to
force others to conform... should their rights, then, be denied?

I suggest the devil may be in the details, and the opposition's reaction may
stem in your word choice. It is not desire that is the social problem
("people who WANT to force others..."), it is action ("people who TRY to
force others..."): What justified any Roman prosecution of individuals was
not their religion, but their lawbreaking and civil disobedience -- if it
were just the religious difference alone, Jewish persecutions would have
been as widespread as Christian ones. I posit that that's what you meant,
but your words in the longer clip above do provide much latitude for
interpretation. Certainly not all Christians were subject to the same
accusation of lawbreaking, any more than all modern Muslims should be
subject to persecution based on the behavior of some of them (despite
Coulter's opinion).

In the post I'm currently responding to, you go on:

"...when all that is really happening is that you don't like my
opinions, and you can't stand it that I have the right to post them
without being harrassed. I want peace on this list. Are you ready to stop
now?"

Might I suggest that the way to make peace is not to cast aspersions on your
opposition?

-- Festus

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: For Marinus
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:08:05 -0600 (CST)

Salve Gale Agori,

> And that even sounds like a
> threat- and if you think you have the right to make threats, you are
> the one that will be in thin ice soon.

A threat of what? that he would lose respect for you?

> You have opened this letter
> with insults, and you continue to insult me- showing what I consider
> to be a lack of dignity.

Marinus's dignity is perfectly intact, in this observer's opinion.

> > L. Sicinus Drusus is an honest and honorable man. I've had

> He has not acted honorable to me- he has shown nothing but intolerace
> and hot-headedness, and he even tried to unlawfully ban me from his
> province. Do all of your "ethical" friends try to break the laws when
> they get angry at a person who has a different opinion?

I almost never agree with L. Sicinius, but he has always acted honorably.

It was G. Cassius Nerva and M. Cornelius Felix who wished to ban you,
not L. Sicinius.

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Candidate for Censor 2756:
http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: For Marinus
From:	Sextus Apollonius Scipio <scipio_apollonius@mailservice.ms>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:10:42 +0100

Salvete Omnes,

> Your lack of dignity is again shown with these ad hominem attacks
>
> an all too common species on the
> > net. While your information may be correct, and indeed I've no
> > quarrel with the factual information you've provided, your
> > presentation and your manners are those of a boor and a lout.
>
>
>
> boor and lout.... more ad hominem attacks...is this how you go about
> gaining people's respect?

This discussion is going too far. The forum is not a place where people insult
or get insulted. I strongly suggest this to halt at once.
Where are the PIETAS and the GRAVITAS here?

Valete,

--
Sextus Apollonius Scipio

Propraetor Galliae
Sodalitas Egressus, Praefectus for France
Scriba Explorator Primus Academiae Thules
Scriba Fiscalis Primus Academiae Thules
NRLandProject, acting Praefectus Pecuniae
French Translator

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through MailService.MS -> http://www.MailService.ms

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Caeso Fabius Quintilianus for Consul
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:22:36 +0100

Roman BriefpapierSalvete colleagues,

I was never very interested in Nova Roman politics until I met Caeso Fabius
Quintilianus. When we met at the Nova Roma Rally in Tongeren last August, my
attitude changed. This man's enthusiasm and love of Nova Roma was positively
contagious! As as result, I found myself curious to learn more about who was
who and who did what in our New Republic.

What no one can see from the Honorable Caeso Fabius Quintilianus' photo is
the twinkling in his bright blue eyes as he speaks about Nova Roma. Although
this may sound silly, he is truly a man 'in love' with Nova Roma and has
proven it many times in all of the work he has done for us. His leadership &
initiatives as the Propraetor of Thule, in the Senate, in the Cohors
Aedilis, & with the Academia Thules have been truly inspirational to many of
us.

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus is a 'doer'. When he says that he will reform
something, he will-- and always for the better. He is a very diplomatic man
and is always unbiased and fair in his dealings with people, a trait that he
no doubt carries over from his macronational job as a teacher for children
with emotional problems. Caeso listens to what the people want and discusses
options with them until a solution can be found that will please everyone.
And best yet, Caeso values the opinions of citizens whether they are a
citizen for 3 days or 3 years and regardless of race or spiritual path. To
him, we are all citizens and our opinions are equally important to him.

Due to my personal experience of Caeso Fabius Quintilianus as a truly
inspirational person, I was honored and flattered to be asked to be part of
his campaign team. I urge anyone who like me, believes that integrity,
honesty, kindness and diplomacy are necessary qualities in a leader of Nova
Roma, to vote for Caeso Fabius Quintilianus for Consul in this coming
election. You won't ever regret it!

Diana Moravia Aventina
Scriba Aedilis Concursus Secunda
to Senior Curule Aedile Caeso Fabius Quintilianus

The Campaign-site of Caeso Fabius Quintilianus for Consul 2756 for
Integrity, Accountability & Reform
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cfq_for_consul/index.html

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	Artemisia <artemisiakore@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 13:20:43 -0800 (PST)

<<--- me-in-@disguise.co.uk wrote:
Only yesterday a Catholic man was found beaten with
nailed baseball bats and nailed to a fence too near to
a Protestant area.>>

Salve!

Was that in the UK? I know that sort of thing tends to
happen a lot in Ireland.

What you described was a Christian persecting (to the
fullest extent) another Christian. Christians in the
"Bible Belt" of America are notorious for killing
homosexuals and abortion doctors (with the full
support of some Catholic priests/leaders). We even
have to fight here to keep judges from basing their
own judgments on the Christian Bible as well as
posting the Ten Commandments in their courtrooms
(well, just that one guy, but he does have a lot of
supporters). I once saw a picture in the paper of a
grade-school age child holding a sign that says "God
Hates Fags." How sick is that?

If I wanted to, I could argue that your example
supports my view, but that would be dishonest. As a
matter of fact, I have on more than one occassion,
pointed out to a person of Pagan belief that in
earlier times the Christians were the ones persecuted
by the Pagans. I don't think it's right in either
case. I believe that if someone truly believes in
something, they shouldn't feel the need to make others
believe the same.

As this seems to be a touchy issue for some people
(and probably way off-topic), I think I'll leave it at
that.

Vale,

Fabia Agoria

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Apology
From:	"g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 21:21:15 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@c...> wrote:
> Salve Gale Agori,

> Marinus's dignity is perfectly intact, in this observer's opinion.

Of course- dignified people often call others "boors", "louts"
and "clueless newbies".

>
> It was G. Cassius Nerva and M. Cornelius Felix who wished to ban
you,
> not L. Sicinius.

My apologies. You are right. Forgive me; my detractors all sound the
same to me.

G.A.T.

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

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Agreeing to Disagree: Apology
From:	"Paul Kershaw" <brighn@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 16:36:12 -0500

My apologies. You are right. Forgive me; my detractors all sound the
same to me.

G.A.T.

Perhaps this was the same error the late Romans made when they rounded up all of the Christians, instead of just the ones causing trouble.

-- Festus

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

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

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


Subject:	OT comment on: Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"Paul Kershaw" <brighn@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 16:40:08 -0500

Fabia Agoria wrote:
"We even
have to fight here to keep judges from basing their
own judgments on the Christian Bible as well as
posting the Ten Commandments in their courtrooms
(well, just that one guy, but he does have a lot of
supporters)."

Not one guy, at least twelve people. The Ten Commandments are on public
display in the United States Supreme Court.

(Unless the "one guy" was in reference to the individual in California who
convinced the Ninth District Circuit Court to rule that "under God" in the
Pledge of Allegiance was, in fact, an act of state-sanctioned religion,
before the President, the Senators, and a vocal group of other shouted them
into freezing their decision.)

-- Festus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 21:56:35 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : Artemisia <artemisiakore@yahoo.com>
>
>Was that in the UK? I know that sort of thing tends to
>happen a lot in Ireland.
>
Whether it was in the UK or not is *itsself* a dangerous political question! From here, 'The North', from there, 'The Province'.

>What you described was a Christian persecting (to the
>fullest extent) another Christian. Christians in the

They do have a rather bad history of it unfortunately but you couldn't exactly call the people who really took to Christianity 'civilised'. At least, the Romans didn't (and the Greeks didn't think much of Roman civilisation). It all comes down to a line Terry Pratchett puts into the mouth of High Priest Hoot Koomi in 'Pyramids' "What do mean, 'we're their people'? They're *our* gods!". And proceeds to tell the gods to get off his patch. It is so much easier to know that you are Right and Justified and everybody else is Doomed because you worship the Right God (or Interpretation of God) and they don't than to pay the blindest bit of attention to what you claim to believe that god actually said. I've yet to hear any justification from Bible Belt 'Christians' that isn't out of the Old Testament - so they're 'really' Jews then? The Koran specifically states to leave 'Peoples of the Book' (Jews, Christians and 'Sabaians, possibly Parsees) in peace, not to seek to convert them, not to mingle with them or persecute them either. So why couldn't American troops celebrate Christmas in the Prophet's homeland? Why have Pakistanis burnt Bibles, which their own religion tells them is blasphemy against the Divine word as given to 'Musha'?
Because it's a lot easier to make god in your own image and worship your own likeness than to actually accept some Organisation beyond your own Ego. According to some liberal theologians it is this, not the actual worship of images, which is condemned as 'Idolatery'.
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

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

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


Subject:	Re: OT comment on: Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:04:26 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : Paul Kershaw <brighn@yahoo.com>

>�We even
>have to fight here to keep judges from basing their
>own judgments on the Christian Bible as well as
>posting the Ten Commandments in their courtrooms
>(well, just that one guy, but he does have a lot of
>supporters).�
>
The Ten Commandments are the Jewish Torah and Muslim Law. Under normal circumstances, not a lot wrong with them. We could do with a bit less 'coveting' at the present time. Of course if you then determine that 'honor thy father and they mother....that thy time be long in the land of Israel' means a free ticket to Tel Aviv if you don't prosecute abusive parents, I suggest that is not the fault of Deuteronomy! Certain 'Christians' might do well to recall one says "Thou shalt not kill", not "Thou shalt kill anybody thou thinkest thy god might dissaprove of because thou doest". Likewise, I seem to recall " 'Vengence is *Mine*' saith the Lord" - ie not yours to decide what you want your Lord to want. I don't recall any suggestion that when the Bible refers to a King of Heaven, the monarchy is constitutional obliged to give Royal Assent to whatever is done in its name.
Vibius Ambrosius Caesariensis.

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

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

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Religious debate and Citizens Leaving
From:	cassius622@aol.com
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 17:08:33 EST

--- In Nova-Roma@y..., "g_agorius_taurinus" <g_agorius_taurinus@y...> wrote:

> How funny you should mention that- That Citizen privately E-mailed me
before she left. She was a friend of mine; she told me that she left
> in disgust at how Drusus was treating me,

Cassius:
It seems to me that Drusus has been harsh with you simply because it was you
yourself that began the harsh tones. Remember those first responses of yours
to Nerva that Pompeia censored briefly? She actually wrote to me about them
before contacting you. I was the one that gave her the advice to respectfully
request that you make the same points in a less snide and angry manner. I
advised her to point out that she should mention that you would be making her
job tougher by being so sarcastic, etc. with your points. But, you were upset
that your civil rights were being infringed, and off the whole adventure
went!

You've certainly made some resonable responses on this list. Particularly to
me. It also seems to me that you've also posted some stuff that is every bit
as snide and nasty as what you've recieved in return.

Taurinus:
and at the nature of his
> public posts, and how nothing was being done to address his public
> insults and hostility.

Cassius:
Indeed, this is true. She felt that Nova Roma should be unconditionally
support you because of your religious beliefs - no matter how you expressed
them. She also felt that anyone attacking the words or personal behavior of a
Pagan was attacking Paganism itself. Since the officials in Nova Roma were
not rushing to your defense, Nova Roma must not be the Pagan community she
believed it to be.

Taurinus:
She felt that Nova Roma was not the place it
> was purporting to be, especially not for pagans.

Cassius:
The Religio Romana is the heart of Nova Roma - but if she thought that those
who profess belief in the Religio are given carte blanche as far as public
behavior, then Nova Roma was indeed *not* the Pagan community she believed it
to be.

This has been an incredibly difficult debate for me personally. I've agreed
with most of the ideas behind your words (belief in the Roman deities, etc.)
but for the most part have disagreed with your methods of argument. I have
not agreed with the religious ideas of some of your opponants - but have been
forced to quietly uphold their right to speak as you do, and to call you on
bad public behavior when necessary.

Frankly, Taurinus, I wish you'd channel all that fervor for the Gods and the
Religio into working on their behalf, rather than continuing these incredibly
fruitless arguments with those who do not share your beliefs. A few positive
and pious actions speak far more loudly and convince more people of the
rightness of your path than a thousand posts to a mailing list.

If it was within my power as Pontifex Maximus to forcibly stop this
particular religious debate, I would do so regardless of who has gotten in
the 'last hit'. It's a pity that no one took the advice from Franklin I
posted early on. That advice is the surest way I've ever seen to win
arguments and preserve one's public dignity, and instead it was dismissed as
a 'wimpy' post on Virtue.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

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

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

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


Subject:	Re: OT comment on: Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	"Paul Kershaw" <brighn@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 17:10:58 -0500

"The Ten Commandments are the Jewish Torah and Muslim Law. Under normal
circumstances, not a lot wrong with them."

Let us not forget the Second Commandment: "Thou shalt have no other Gods
except[1] Me." That's in violation of the First Amendment of the United
States, and as such, has no place in a U.S. Federal Building of any manner,
especially that of the Supreme Court.

I'll spare the list a detailed analysis of "Thou shalt not commit murder,"
but suffice to say that I feel it's narrower than you're suggesting. It's
acceptable.

A prohibition against adultery, by the Jewish definition of, I take umbrage
with, and also note that our former President couldn't follow that one, but
supported the Ten Commandments. And I believe nearly every President we've
had has borne false witness now and then. ;)

Honoring thy parents, I think, is well in line with Pagan Roman thought as
well, so long as "parents" is broadened to "ancestors."

No cursing, no coveting, no theft, taking a day of rest now and then...
those are acceptable concepts, sure.

-- Festus

[1] This is usually "before," but that leads to an inappropriate
interpretation, "In your worship, I must be your primary God." Bible
scholars seem to be fairly much of a univeral opinion that the proper
translation is, "I must be your ONLY God."

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] ENDORSEMENTS
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Tiberius=20Apollonius=20Cicatrix?= <consulromanus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:22:03 +0000 (GMT)

Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix aedilis plebis omnibus
SPD

I hereby express my support to the following
candidates:

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus for consul - I have had the
opportunity to meet this wonderful and hard-working
man at the Nova Roma Rally in Tongeren earlier this
year. We also cooperated this year on many occasions,
mostly in relation with our offices of Aedilis Curulis
and Plebis. Caeso works very hard to the advantage of
Nova Roma, and he belongs body and soul to our beloved
Res Publica. He has set himself the different tasks to
work for the dream of Nova Roma, and he is determined
to fulfil this dream so that it becomes reality.
Therefore I am convinced he is most able to do this in
the position of consul of Nova Roma. I ask all
citizens to vote for this magnificent man. Caeso
Fabius Quintilianus for integrity, accountability
and reform! Vote Caeso!!

http://www.insulaumbra.com/cfq_for_consul/

Marcus Octavius Germanicus for censor - We all know
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, our good and smart Consul
and webmaster (Curator Araneum). He has gone through
the Cursus honorum, and he will now take the final
step: Censor. I ask all citizens to support Marcus
Octavius Germanicus in his candidacy for the office
of Censor! I am convinced everyone here knows the many
abilities he has, especially in the area of
informatics. This knowledge will of course serve him
very well as a censor. Marcus Octavius Germanicus is
also a wise and moderate person, always prepared to
listen and to take the necessary actions whenever
there is need for these. In short, Marcus Octavius
Germanicus is the perfect candidate for the office of
Censor! Vote Marcus Octavius Germanicus!!

http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor/

Manius Constantinus Serapio for quaestor - In the past
year Manius Constantinus Serapio has served me as my
scriba. In this position I got to know him as a nice,
friendly and hard-working man, with a typical Italian
affinity for the Res Publica Novae Romae. Of course we
all remember and still anjoy the Venationes he
organised during the Ludi Apollinares and the Ludi
Plebeii now, his great work for the Sodalitas
Egressus, and his dedication in the development of the
Societas Iuventutis Romanae. He is clearly dedicated
to Nova Roma, and he totally deserves to serve as a
quaestor! If elected, and I am sure he will, he shall
be able to show everyone his many capabilities.
Citizens, give Manius Constantinus Serapio this
opportunity! Vote Serapio!!

http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/serapio.html

Sextus Apollonius Scipio for quaestor - As
paterfamilias of Gens Apollonia, I know Sextus
Apollonius Scipio rather well. My 'filius' is also the
Propraetor of Gallia, and has recently started to
offer the citizens of Nova Roma Roman archaeology news
(Apollonia Acta). Sextus Apollonius Scipio is also
dedicated to Nova Roma, and he only wants the best for
our Res Publica. In his macronational life he has
already gained much experience in the financial field,
perfect qualifications for the office of quaestor.
Therefor I ask the citizens to cast your vote for
Sextus Apollonius Scipio as quaestor. Vote Scipio, an
example of Dignitas and Virtus!!

http://www.fr-novaroma.com/Quaestorship/

Citizens of Nova Roma, cast your votes well! Support
these magnificent men for the prosperity of our Res
Publica!

Valete bene

=====
Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix
----------
Aedilis Plebis
Quintilianus for Consul! http://www.insulaumbra.com/cfq_for_consul/index.html
Octavius for Censor! http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor
Serapio for Quaestor! http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/Serapio_for_Quaestor.html
Scipio for Quaestor! http://www.fr-novaroma.com/Quaestorship

__________________________________________________
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

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Ludi Plebeii - Quiz 1
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Tiberius=20Apollonius=20Cicatrix?= <consulromanus@yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:30:34 +0000 (GMT)

Salvete!

QUIZ

Who knows most on Ancient Rome?

Very simple: five questions each day, some multiple
choice and some not; some difficult ones and some easy
ones�

Questions covering all aspects of Roma Antiqua:
military, history, literature, �

Send your answers to consulromanus@yahoo.com (don�t
forget to include you Nova Roma name), putting �QUIZ�
in the subject line.

The results will be posted each day on the main list,
so participate as much as you can!

Here are today's questions:

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

1. Approximately how many legionaries were there in
one �centuria�?
- 50
- 80
- 100
- 120

2. At which battle was Hannibal finally defeated?
- Cannae
- Trasimene
- Zama
- Trebia

3. By whom was Rome sacked first?

4. Fabius Maximus' nickname was?
- The Destroyer
- The Delayer
- The Determinator
- The Deliverer

5. How did Titus Manlius Torquatus punish his son?
- he slapped him across the face
- he ordered his head cut off
- he threw him in the Tiber
- he married him to an ugly woman

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

Take part in the quiz, and see who knows most on
Ancient Rome!!

Valete bene

=====
Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix
----------
Aedilis Plebis
Quintilianus for Consul! http://www.insulaumbra.com/cfq_for_consul/index.html
Octavius for Censor! http://romanrepublic.org/octavius/censor
Serapio for Quaestor! http://www.geocities.com/mcserapio/Serapio_for_Quaestor.html
Scipio for Quaestor! http://www.fr-novaroma.com/Quaestorship

__________________________________________________
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

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

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


Subject:	Re: OT comment on: Re: [Nova-Roma] Polytheism and Monotheism
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:38:15 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : Paul Kershaw <brighn@yahoo.com>
>
In general. Once the nitpicking starts, well any laws can run into trouble. I don't like the Second Commandment either but of course *in context* it was not likely to be anything else!
>
>
>A prohibition against adultery, by the Jewish definition of, I take
Interpretation again. If you take it as once committed to a relationship, stick with it, it is a reasonable enough requirement.
I wouldn't expect any simple code to be 100% and I don't like the implications of 'god-given' morality either: if it's handed down, you don't have to thinnk it out for yourself, nor do you question what else you might be told. Conversely, as over-zealous churches have found, once you mix a load of irrelevent beliefs like how long it took to make the universe, in and they get shot to pieces, *all* that morality is likely to go too, even the bits anybody could agree necessary for civilised living.

>[1] This is usually �before,� but that leads to an inappropriate
>interpretation, �In your worship, I must be your primary God.� Bible
>scholars seem to be fairly much of a univeral opinion that the proper
>translation is, �I must be your ONLY God.�
>
I wonder if that's what it meant *then*?
Vibius

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] that's enough, thank you.
From:	Joanne Shaver <merlinia@comcast.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Nov 2002 18:21:34 -0500

Salvete, L.S.Drusus, G.A.Taurinus, and anyone else who utters another
peep about all this Mono/Poly Etc stuff

Merlinia Ambrosia Artori sends Greetings.And a gag...

I am not going to give my opinion; I am not going to discuss how or
when or where this can be discussed. Many people have tried, nicely, to
get this dropped. We have Other Things to discuss.

GET OVER IT!
CUT IT OUT ALL OF YOU!

And I will not soil my dignatas to answer you, either.

-M.

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] The Decalog and Christianity (was: Polytheism and Monotheism)
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Hirtius=20Helveticus?=" <hirtius75ch@yahoo.de>
Date:	Tue, 5 Nov 2002 00:56:26 +0100 (CET)

Salvete Quirites

First, I want to point out, that with the following
posting I will somehow be on thin ice, because I have
not studied theology. But I'll try anyway - so feel
free to comment my thoughts.

Secondly, I want to make clear that I respect
everyone's beliefs, be they pagan, jewish, christian
or even atheistic.

Now, in medias res:
Concerning the Decalog and Christianity, one has to
keep the following facts in mind:

- The early Christians were divided into two groups:
converted jews (the circumcised) and converted pagans.

- The early Christians did not have the new testament
yet, they only had the old testament.

- Besides the Decalog, there are many other rules in
the old testament (washings, not eating blood etc.
pp.).

Now, Peter had, in many of his letters, an ambivalent
opinion about the Decalog. Also many gnostics thought,
that, since there is such a big difference between
matter and the immaterial world, any actions taken do
not make any differences at all.

Furthermore, the council of Jerusalem in 50 AD pointed
out only four commandements mandatory for converted
pagans (no offerings to other deities, no eating of
blood, only eating of kosher meat and no adultery).

Also, there were and still are so-called
antinomianists (people who reject the necessity of
obeying the Mosaic Law for christians). Some scholars
even say, that Peter was one of them.

Concerning the first Commandement: The Catholic
Catechism says, that one should have only _one_ God,
while f.ex. the lutheran one (at least the German one
from 1962) quotes the bible saying that one should not
have _any other god_ beside God. The second
Commandement (not making any pictures of God) then is
dropped by the Catholics (the second one in the
Catechism is the third in the olt testament). In order
to keep the number of 10, in the Catechism the last
Commandement got divided into two (9: the other's
wife, 10: the other's possesions).

Now, what do I want to say with this? Since I am a
Roman Catholic and try to follow the Catechism (to be
honest, rather as a guideline than a law) and based on
my experience and the facts I presented, I would
consider myself a antinomianist (I f.ex. love sausages
made out of blood - a regional speciality here...).
One simply can't understand - from a christian
viewpoint of course - the old testament without the
new one and vice versa.

Now, since we don't live in ancient times nor any
other pre-enlightment times, we all have the ideal of
religious freedom. Therefore I pledge here again for
more tolerance in our discussions about religious
beliefs.

I would welcome some of the presented changes of our
constitution - as long as they respect the the
religion of the ancients which was the fundament of
the republic.

Valete bene,

=====
A. Hirtius Helveticus
-------------------------
"Res Romana Dei est, terrenis non eget armis."
(Corippus, In laudem Iustini 3, 328)
-------------------------
http://www.hirtius.ch.tt/
-------------------------

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
M�chten Sie mit einem Gru� antworten? http://grusskarten.yahoo.de


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Declaration for Head of the Sodalitas Iuventutis
From:	Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <christer.edling@telia.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Nov 2002 00:56:49 +0100

Salve Honorable Gaius Cassius Marius!

I will answer You more in depth privately, but I can just say that at
the moment SIR is SOCIETAS IVVENTVTIS ROMANAE (which not is a
acknowledged Sodaltas as You mentioned), which is headed by myself by
appointment of the Senior Consul. There also is ta committee,
appointed by me, to work out a Charter for a Roman Youth
organisation, maybe to be called "Sodalitas Iuventutis Romanae". This
work has taken a break during the election period and I expect it to
start working in at least December.

First the Charter must be accepted by the Senate and the there will
be an election, hopefully during the spring.

>I would like to be voted in as Head of the Sodalitas Iuventutis Romanae.
>Please put me in on the ballot. I'm perfectly aware that SIR is not too well
>known or even recognized as a Sodalitas, but, that's what I plan on doing.
>Thank You
>
>Gaius Cassius Marius

--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senator et Senior Curule Aedile
Propraetor Thules
AUCTOR LEGIONIS, Legio VII "Res Publica"
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
"Fautor Societatis Iuventutis Romanae"
************************************************
The Campaign-site of "Caeso Fabius Quintilianus for Consul 2756"
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cfq_for_consul/index.html
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
"Integrity, Accountability, Reform"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness