Forum Romanum


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 02:03:09 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus L. Cornelio Sullae Felici salutem dicit.

Salve, Luci Corneli.

Scripsisti:

> Not exactly, you forget what really got Ti Sempronius Gracchus
killed was not only his manipulations of the traditions of the
Republic but it was also his quest for Land Reform and breaking up the
estates of the Senators and other members of the First Class.

While I was actually making a joke, there was a historical point in my
remark. I contend that Senatorial violence against T. Sempronius
Gracchus would never have occurred if T. Sempronius hadn't found a
practical way to implement the land reform by using a plebscite to
allocate the funds made available by the creation of the province of
Asia to that purpose. What T. Sempronius did was involve the plebs
both in foreign policy (the bequest of the king of Pergamum of what
became the province of Asia to Rome) and in the allocation of state
funds, both areas in which the Senate had hitherto had virtually
unilateral control, and he did so without following the precedent of
seeking a senatus consultum prior to presenting legislation to the
concilium plebis, It was only after he end-ran the Senate to provide
the funds for the land reform (and thrust the plebs into foreign
policy to do it*) that he became a mortal threat to the Senatorial
elite; without those funds his land reform bill would have gone
nowhere. David Stockton's treatment of these issues in _The Gracchi_
(Oxford, 1979) seems to me persuasive.

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus

*Recall how the near-contemporary Polybius characterised it: "pr˜s d
t˜v dmon kath‡pax oudŽn esti t™v proeiremŽnon" (sorry, I don't know
the html for the breathing-marks and Yahoo isn't displaying my usual
Greek font).


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Opening of the Megalensia week
From:	Iulia Vopisca <iulia_uopisca@yahoo.com>
Date:	Thu, 3 Apr 2003 18:28:02 -0800 (PST)

SALVETE OMNES!

I make this prayer of offering to Cybele, Great Idaean Mother of the Gods, to commemorate the opening of Her sacred festival week, the Megalensia!

SALVE MATER DEVM MAGNA IDAEA
SALVE O DEA MAIOR SANCTISSIMA
TE PRECOR BONAS PRECES O CYBELE
BERECYNTHIA MATER DINDYMENE
TE QVAESO IN CVSTODELAM NOS TVAM
VTINAM RECIPIAS ET TVTERE
TIBI OFFERO HANC ORATIONEM
VT DES PACEM PROPITIA SALVTEM
ET SANITATEM NOSTRAE FAMILIAE
VTI SIS VOLENS PROPITIA NOBIS
ET NVNQVAM DESOLES LIBEROS TVOS

Translation is provided, with more images and information, at the link below:

http://www.aztriad.com/cybele.html

and a bit of history at:

http://www.aztriad.com/nrcybele.html

OPTIME VALETE IN LVCE MATRIS MAGNAE ....

PACEM VENIAMQVE DEORVM TIBI EXOPTET IVLIA VOPISCA

http://www.aztriad.com/cybeleix.html

* MATRIS DEVM MAGNAE IDEAEAE SACERDOS FILIAQVE *

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Thu, 3 Apr 2003 18:47:22 -0800

Ave G. Iulius,

I understand your response was a joke. I actually had two responses for your post...I sent the one that was a bit more serious in tone. My other response was definately more lighthearted in nature.

Yes, I am aware of the precedent that Tribune T. Sempronius was setting during his tenure as Tribune of the Plebs, as you can probably tell by my Roman name, I do not hold the Sempronii in the highest esteem. I view them as politicans pure and simple who tried to manipulate the system for their own gain.

I also recommend Mommsen's work on the Late Roman Republic and Scullard's From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 BC to 68 AD as well.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Gregory Rose
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 6:03 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote

G. Iulius Scaurus L. Cornelio Sullae Felici salutem dicit.

Salve, Luci Corneli.

Scripsisti:

> Not exactly, you forget what really got Ti Sempronius Gracchus
killed was not only his manipulations of the traditions of the
Republic but it was also his quest for Land Reform and breaking up the
estates of the Senators and other members of the First Class.

While I was actually making a joke, there was a historical point in my
remark. I contend that Senatorial violence against T. Sempronius
Gracchus would never have occurred if T. Sempronius hadn't found a
practical way to implement the land reform by using a plebscite to
allocate the funds made available by the creation of the province of
Asia to that purpose. What T. Sempronius did was involve the plebs
both in foreign policy (the bequest of the king of Pergamum of what
became the province of Asia to Rome) and in the allocation of state
funds, both areas in which the Senate had hitherto had virtually
unilateral control, and he did so without following the precedent of
seeking a senatus consultum prior to presenting legislation to the
concilium plebis, It was only after he end-ran the Senate to provide
the funds for the land reform (and thrust the plebs into foreign
policy to do it*) that he became a mortal threat to the Senatorial
elite; without those funds his land reform bill would have gone
nowhere. David Stockton's treatment of these issues in _The Gracchi_
(Oxford, 1979) seems to me persuasive.

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus

*Recall how the near-contemporary Polybius characterised it: "pr~s d
t~v dmon kath?pax oudZn esti tTv proeiremZnon" (sorry, I don't know
the html for the breathing-marks and Yahoo isn't displaying my usual
Greek font).


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Quote of the day
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 02:29:31 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus M. Umbrio Urso salutem dicit.

Salve, Marce Umbri.

Scripsisti:

> I simply haven't seen anything that suggests that Roman "race"/color
> prejudices were as extreme as those which have tainted the modern world.
>
> If you have links (or references that you could cite) that might
indicate
> how bad this was in Rome, I'd be most interested.
>
> My impression is simply that Romans were not, on average, as
> color-conscious and as prejudiced on "racial" grounds.
>
> One would assume, for example, that the darker Italic skin would
have made
> the simplistic Black-White spectrum a non-starter. After all, the paler
> Celts and Teutonic peoples were (no doubt) inferior to Romans, as
much as
> Greeks, Carthaginians, Nubians and so forth.
America Austroccidentalis.)

I'm not at all certain that is it possible from the sources to compare
with any real precision the degree of racial prejudice in today's
world and the Roman world. My point was that the impression that
Roman society was relatively colour-blind, as Sherwin-White suggested.
has not been borne out by more recent scholarship. A taste of the
sort of scholarship to which I am referring can be obtained from:

Gay L. Byron, _Symbolic Blackness and Ethnic Difference in Early
Christian Literature_ (London, 2002) -- Byron also presents a great
deal of Graeco-Roman pre-Christian and Pagan evidence.

Robert E.Hood, _Begrimed and Black: Christian Traditions on Blacks and
Blackness_ (Minneapolis, 1994) -- Like Byron, Hood has useful material
on pre- and non-Christian attitudes.

Robert Garland, _The Eye of the Beholder: Deformity and Disability in
the Greco-Roman World_ (Ithaca, 1995).

David Noy, _Foreigners at Rome: Citizens and Strangers_ (London, 2000).

Stephen Mitchell and Geoffrey Greatrex, eds., _Ethnicity and Culture
in Late Antiquity_ (London, 2000).

Derek A. Welsby, _The Medieval Kingdoms of Nubia: Pagans, Christians
and Muslims along the Middle Nile_ (London, 2002) -- this has a
greater amount of evidence from antiquity than the title suggests.

I'm sorry, but I don't know of any websites that treat this issue in a
scholarly way. I hope these citations will be helpful.

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 00:50:46 -0500

Salve

Sulla Wrote > "I view them as politicians pure and simple who tried to
manipulate the system for their own gain."

As opposed to the Conscript Fathers of the Roman Senate who only served Rome
and did only what was best for her, never doing anything for their own ends.

Except maybe a little

SACRILEGIOUS JUDICIAL MURDER OF A TRIBUNE OF THE PEOPLE,

I agree with Dr. Christopher Mackay Associate Professor in the Department of
History and Classics of the University of Alberta when he said

It was the "optimates," the supporters of the ruling oligarchy, who felt so
threatened by Gracchus that they resorted to this violence. Eventually, they
would reap the rewards of this action, since they were to be the principal
victims of the violence. They killed Gracchus because they felt threatened
by his use of the powers of the concilium plebis against the will of the
oligarchy. Gracchus' tribunate thus marks the first major example of the
use, by a member of the oligarchy, of popular discontent to further his own
career. Gracchus stumbled into his conflict with the oligarchy
unintentionally. The Republic was to be destroyed by members of the
oligarchy who quite consciously tried to advance themselves to the detriment
of the Republican system.

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Thu, 3 Apr 2003 21:57:55 -0800

Ave Ti. Galerius,

Please do not put words in my statement. If you want to know my opinions, please ask for them. I will be more than pleased to respond.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen Gallagher
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote

Salve

Sulla Wrote > "I view them as politicians pure and simple who tried to
manipulate the system for their own gain."

As opposed to the Conscript Fathers of the Roman Senate who only served Rome
and did only what was best for her, never doing anything for their own ends.

Except maybe a little

SACRILEGIOUS JUDICIAL MURDER OF A TRIBUNE OF THE PEOPLE,

I agree with Dr. Christopher Mackay Associate Professor in the Department of
History and Classics of the University of Alberta when he said

It was the "optimates," the supporters of the ruling oligarchy, who felt so
threatened by Gracchus that they resorted to this violence. Eventually, they
would reap the rewards of this action, since they were to be the principal
victims of the violence. They killed Gracchus because they felt threatened
by his use of the powers of the concilium plebis against the will of the
oligarchy. Gracchus' tribunate thus marks the first major example of the
use, by a member of the oligarchy, of popular discontent to further his own
career. Gracchus stumbled into his conflict with the oligarchy
unintentionally. The Republic was to be destroyed by members of the
oligarchy who quite consciously tried to advance themselves to the detriment
of the Republican system.

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] MEGALESIA LUDI, now open!
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <fraelov@yahoo.it>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 09:01:30 -0000

Franciscus Apulus Caesar Omnibus S.P.D.

I'm very very proud to open the first festival of 2756, the
Megalesia Ludi!

The Megalesia are games offered to the noble Goddess Magna Mater, a
foreign goddess imported in Rome during the 2nd Punic War and became
one of the most important in the Olympus (known as Cybele too).
The goddess' sacred black stone was brought from Phrygia in Asia
Minor and housed in a temple consecrated/opened on April 10, 191
B.C.E. The Ludi were organized by the Aediles and the priests of the
Magna Mater were called the Gallae. When the Magna Mater was first
introduced to Rome, aristocratic families formed sodalitates [clubs]
in honor of the Cybele. A practice rapidly developed from these
clubs in which patrician families held dinner parties [mutitationes]
for each other on the first night of the Ludi. Over time these
banquets became wildly elaborate and ostentatious.

>From today to 10th April the citizens of Nova Roma will can
partecipe to sevaral and exciting games and shows started yet during
the last month.
The program of the Ludi is the following:

- 4th April -
Opening of the Ludi
Religious Celebrations of Magna Mater

- 5th April -
VENATIONES
... funny combats between gladiatores and animals

- 6th April -
ARCHEOLOGICAL DAY
... a day dedicated to pur archeological projects. In a particular
way, we announce you all the exciting news about the Project of
Restoration of Temple of Magna Mater [Palatin Hill]

- 7th April -
MEGALESIA CULTURAL AWARD '56
... a little contest of epigrams, the most satirical art of Latin
wirters

AGE OF EMPIRE, RISE OF ROME EXP GAME
... a on-line multiplayer tournament of the most famous and popular
videogame about Rome.

- 8th April -
MUNERA GLADIATORIA
... the Gladiatores fighting in the Arena ann public
voicing "Maximus, Maximus, ..."

- 9th April -
NAUMACHIAE
... for the first time in Nova Roma, the ecceptional and rare
virtual gnaval battle.

- 10th April -
LUDI CIRCENSES
... the most famous game in Rome and Nova Roma, the first races of
the year!

Religious celebrations of Magna Mater
Closing of the Ludi.

[other events will be organized during this days like the quarters
and semifinals of each game]

Further informations will be published today at
http://aediles.novaroma.org/apulus/
The Megalesia Ludi are organized by my wonderful Cohors in
collaboration with the Junio Curule Aedile Gnaeus Equitius Marinus.
Thank you all !!!
Please, note the joint declaration we'll send you.

I hope you have a wonderful a funny days during the Megalesia Ludi!

Valete
Franciscus Apulus Caesar
Senior Curule Aedile
Propraetor Provinciae Italiae


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <fraelov@yahoo.it>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 09:15:43 -0000

Ex officio Senior Curule Aedile Franciscus Apulus Caesar et Cohors
omnibus S.P.D.

We would like to make an statement bounded to the Joint Declaration
of Neutrality of Nova Roma on the current war conflict.

The Ludi Megalesia will be carried on almost as always.
However, feeling grief for the war and a real hope for those who
suffer, we would like to tell all the Citizenship that Games will be
narrated with a special concern. There will be neither dead
Gladiators nor Racers, and the Naumachiae won't have a single dead
sailor. Not one scene of blood, or a murder or a dirty action
or "partial" comment will be written respecting the soldiers in war
and the innocent people under the bombs.
The Ludi Megalesia of 2756 a.u.c. don't want to promote virtual
death in any way and Show & Entertainment can't be a excuse for it.
Therefore, it will be a quiet and non-violence Ludi.
It's not "the show must go on", this is our way to say the WE WANT
THE PEACE everywhere and for everybody.

As the Consuls has declared, we expect from the whole Citizenship
respect for the current declaration and the wish of a better
international relationship for building a stronger Nova Roma.

As you know the Roman Ludi are dedicated each to a specific God.
This games are dedicated to the Roman Magna Mater. By the way, we
pray the Gods of all the religions to give us the Peace as soon as
possible.

Signed by the following members of F. Apulus Caesar Cohors Aedilis:

* F. Apulus Cesar - Senior Curule Aedile
* M. Constatinus Serapio - Quaestor
* Gn. Salix Galaicus - Scriba Ludorum Primus
* M. Iulius Perusianus - Scriba Historicus Primus
* G. Fabia Livia - Scriba Historica Secunda
* L. Didius Geminus Sceptius - Scriba Ludorum Secundus
* C. Curius Saturninus - Scriba Ludorum
* D. Moravia Aventina - Scriba ad Narrationes
* Renata Corva - Scriba ad Narrationes


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] "tried to advance themselves?"
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 04:26:31 EST

In a message dated 4/3/03 9:52:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, spqr753@msn.com
writes:

> It was the "optimates," the supporters of the ruling oligarchy, who felt so
> threatened by Gracchus that they resorted to this violence. Eventually,
> they
> would reap the rewards of this action, since they were to be the principal
> victims of the violence....
The Republic was to be destroyed by members of the>
> oligarchy who quite consciously tried to advance themselves to the
> detriment
> of the Republican system.
>
Quite an overview there, but not much original thought into it. Remember,
before anybody here gets slap happy, we are not trying to to start a
Principate, so we have no Iulius Caesar. The demagogues who have come and
gone in this micronation had no basis, other then they wanted to make
change, for changes' sake alone. What our Senate is doing monetarily has
nothing to do with what Rome's Senate was doing.
Historically Iulius had enemies among the Senatorial class. What powerful
leader didn't?
But to claim the Senate destroyed itself in over reaching is an over
simplication at best. The majority of the Senate backed the losing side in a
civil war. Pompeius didn't have the political knowledge nor the military
strategy to beat Iulius. Anybody who studies the campaigns is struck by the
risks Iulius took, and had Pompeius acted on several of his opportunities
there would be no Iulius.
However, it is obvious that Iulius knew Pompeius, knew how timid he was, and
was safe in making his audacious moves.
Interestingly enough, whenever Pharsalus is refought as a wargame the
Pompeians win.
It is obvious that even the Romans fighting against Iulius had no heart in
doing so.

Q*FABIVS*MAXIMVS

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 04:39:54 EST

In a message dated 4/4/03 1:17:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, fraelov@yahoo.it
writes:

> There will be neither dead Gladiators nor Racers, and the Naumachiae
won't have a single dead > sailor.

That's absurd. Repeat after me. This is virtual! No other military gaming
societies or reenactments through out the world has canceled their events,
nor should they. While the war in Iraq is tragic, it has nothing to do with
Nova Roma, and I believe you have over reacted when such over reaction is
completely unwarranted.
You have brought a political statement, into a venue that does not
need such political statements. I see that you are all running for
magistracies.

Valete
Q*FABIVS*MAXIMVS

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <fraelov@yahoo.it>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 11:02:44 -0000

Salve Senator,

first of all, in our joint declaration we have asked to respect our
action. It seems you don't want to do it.

Second, this is not a my political statements but a decision of a
groups of citizens organizing funny events. I haven't published an
official edictum, this is an informal declaration.
We don't want cancel the Ludi and the games because as you have said
the war not concern Nova Roma. Nova Roma is neutral and we want
follow the guidelines indicating by our Illustres Consules.

However we had a "brain storm" about the opportunity to organize
violent Ludi. We all are for the peace and we feel this moment as a
sad time for the people everywhere and of every Nations (Nova Roma
too).
The neutrality isn't indifference!
We are only saying: "there are several people dieing in Iraq,
soldiers and civilians. In our opinion scene of blood and death and
violences and murders could not respect this people. We prefer limit
these scenes and organize more easy and peaceful games".
What's absurd? What means virtual or real? The idea of the peace is
virtual or real? Playing a terrible war film showing the death not-
respecting the public is virtual? Is correct to play it? Do you
think the idea of the peace in a game is less important of the "real
idea" about a "real event"?
I think the ideas are the same, the Peace is just one idea, others
don't exist.
The Cohors don't know the answers, but we don't want hurt anybody.

So, this is our personal opinion, please respect it. If you don't
respect it, you don't respect us and the ideas of others. This is
our personal feelings and we can't work against their.

You'll have the same exciting games of the last year but with less
blood and violence. What's strange?

I wish you all to play a funny and peaceful festival.

Vale
Fr. Apulus Caesar
Senior Curule Aedile

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, qfabiusmaxmi@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/4/03 1:17:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
fraelov@y...
> writes:
>
>
> > There will be neither dead Gladiators nor Racers, and the
Naumachiae
> won't have a single dead > sailor.
>
> That's absurd. Repeat after me. This is virtual! No other
military gaming
> societies or reenactments through out the world has canceled their
events,
> nor should they. While the war in Iraq is tragic, it has nothing
to do with
> Nova Roma, and I believe you have over reacted when such over
reaction is
> completely unwarranted.
> You have brought a political statement, into a venue that does not
> need such political statements. I see that you are all running
for
> magistracies.
>
> Valete
> Q*FABIVS*MAXIMVS
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Congratulations!
From:	"nathan guiboche" <nathanguiboche@hotmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 06:13:05 -0600

Salve Consul

I will do my best to further the interests of the Provincia . My task is
made easier due to good response I am recieveing from the citizens of Canada
Occidentalis! Once more, thank you Sir.

Quintus Sertorius
Propraetor
Canada Occidentalis

>From: Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <christer.edling@telia.com>
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Nova-Roma] Congratulations!
>Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 23:48:01 +0200
>
>Salve Illustrus Quintus Sertorius!
>
>I warmly congratulate You to your appointment as Propraetor of Canada
>Occidentalis Provincia! I am sure that You will develop it to a
>strong and flourishing Provincia! Good Luck!
>--
>
>Vale
>
>Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
>Senior Consul et Senator
>Propraetor Thules
>Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
>Civis Romanus sum
>************************************************
>Cohors Consulis CFQ
>http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
>************************************************
>Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
>"I'll either find a way or make one"
>************************************************
>Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
>Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
>

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Congratulations!
From:	"nathan guiboche" <nathanguiboche@hotmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 06:15:43 -0600

Salve Sir

Thank you for the kind words, and I shall work hard to live up to them!

Quintus Sertorius
Propraetor
Canada Occidentalis

>From: MarcusAudens@webtv.net
>Reply-To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Congratulations!
>Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 18:24:36 -0500 (EST)
>
>Congratulations Quintus Sertorius;
>
>May the days of your Praetorship be crowned with success!!!!
>
>Respectfully;
> Marcus Minucius Audens
>
>A wet sheet and a flowing sea, and a wind follows fast, and fills the
>white and rustling sail, and bends the gallant mast; and bends the
>gallant mast my boys while like the eagle free, our good ship starts and
>flies and leaves old England on our lee------Fair Winds and following
>Seas!!!
>

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 06:23:40 -0800 (PST)

Salve,
You have turned the games into a macronational
political statement, and attempted to hide from
cricitism behind a call for "respect".

I Can't imigine any circumstances that would induce
the Romans of Antiquita to alter the games other than
a clear omen that the Gods were displeased. I See no
mention of any omens, just a political statement from
the pacifist viewpoint, one that is hardly in keeping
with the Martial chachter of the Romans of Antiquita.

The idea that the Romans of old would alter the
content of the games because of a war being waged by
two forigen nations, a war that the Roman government
had declared it's neutrality in, is completly
ahistoric.

If Nova Roma's neutrality is to be more than a sham,
no support should be given to any macronational
political viewpoint during offical Nova Roman events,
and that includes support for the so called "peace
movement".

If citizens wish to support one macronational
political viewpoint or another privatly, that is thier
right, but this support should NOT become part of any
OFFICAL acts staged on behalf of Nova Roma, and that
includes these games.

--- Franciscus Apulus Caesar <fraelov@yahoo.it> wrote:
> Salve Senator,
>
> first of all, in our joint declaration we have asked
> to respect our
> action. It seems you don't want to do it.
>
> Second, this is not a my political statements but a
> decision of a
> groups of citizens organizing funny events. I
> haven't published an
> official edictum, this is an informal declaration.
> We don't want cancel the Ludi and the games because
> as you have said
> the war not concern Nova Roma. Nova Roma is neutral
> and we want
> follow the guidelines indicating by our Illustres
> Consules.
>
> However we had a "brain storm" about the opportunity
> to organize
> violent Ludi. We all are for the peace and we feel
> this moment as a
> sad time for the people everywhere and of every
> Nations (Nova Roma
> too).
> The neutrality isn't indifference!
> We are only saying: "there are several people dieing
> in Iraq,
> soldiers and civilians. In our opinion scene of
> blood and death and
> violences and murders could not respect this people.
> We prefer limit
> these scenes and organize more easy and peaceful
> games".
> What's absurd? What means virtual or real? The idea
> of the peace is
> virtual or real? Playing a terrible war film showing
> the death not-
> respecting the public is virtual? Is correct to play
> it? Do you
> think the idea of the peace in a game is less
> important of the "real
> idea" about a "real event"?
> I think the ideas are the same, the Peace is just
> one idea, others
> don't exist.
> The Cohors don't know the answers, but we don't want
> hurt anybody.
>
> So, this is our personal opinion, please respect it.
> If you don't
> respect it, you don't respect us and the ideas of
> others. This is
> our personal feelings and we can't work against
> their.
>
> You'll have the same exciting games of the last year
> but with less
> blood and violence. What's strange?
>
> I wish you all to play a funny and peaceful
> festival.
>
> Vale
> Fr. Apulus Caesar
> Senior Curule Aedile
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, qfabiusmaxmi@a...
> wrote:
> > In a message dated 4/4/03 1:17:20 AM Pacific
> Standard Time,
> fraelov@y...
> > writes:
> >
> >
> > > There will be neither dead Gladiators nor
> Racers, and the
> Naumachiae
> > won't have a single dead > sailor.
> >
> > That's absurd. Repeat after me. This is virtual!
> No other
> military gaming
> > societies or reenactments through out the world
> has canceled their
> events,
> > nor should they. While the war in Iraq is tragic,
> it has nothing
> to do with
> > Nova Roma, and I believe you have over reacted
> when such over
> reaction is
> > completely unwarranted.
> > You have brought a political statement, into a
> venue that does not
> > need such political statements. I see that you
> are all running
> for
> > magistracies.
> >
> > Valete
> > Q*FABIVS*MAXIMVS
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

Roman Citizen

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"L. Didius Geminus Sceptius" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 14:32:21 -0000

Salvete Senator Maximus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, qfabiusmaxmi@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/4/03 1:17:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
fraelov@y...
> writes:

> > There will be neither dead Gladiators nor Racers, and the
Naumachiae > won't have a single dead > sailor.
>
> That's absurd. Repeat after me. This is virtual! No other
military gaming > societies or reenactments through out the world has
canceled their events, > nor should they. While the war in Iraq is
tragic, it has nothing to do with > Nova Roma, and I believe you have
over reacted when such over reaction is > completely unwarranted.

SCEPTIVS: Humbly, Senator, I won't "repeat after you" because this is
not a ludiocrous declaration. We asked for respect, and maybe this
word was misunderstunding, but I'll clarify it if possible.
Due to the Joint Declaration of our current Consularii Nova Roma is
Neutral to this war. We the team for the Ludi Megalesia has the duty
of making the games to entertain the citizenship but as individuals
we have also a mind and the will of not spreading the seeds for
violence.
Respect is taking this as a team-declaration in which you can be agree
or disagree, but never tell it is an "Absurd".

> You have brought a political statement, into a venue that does not
> need such political statements. I see that you are all running for
> magistracies.

SCEPTIVS: Not at all, Senator. What are we running for? The most of
all hold an office, and we are in april. So may I suggest that there
is a demagogic will in your political statement?

> Valete
> Q*FABIVS*MAXIMVS

vale bene,

L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"L. Didius Geminus Sceptius" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 14:45:42 -0000

Salve Honorable Senator Drusus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus"
<lsicinius@y...> wrote:
> Salve,
> You have turned the games into a macronational> political statement,
and attempted to hide from> cricitism behind a call for "respect".

SCEPTIVS: As I said before, we don't look for a political statement
and less over we try to "hide" it. We have just expressed our right to
run the Ludi as we think them should be run.

>
> I Can't imigine any circumstances that would induce > the Romans of
Antiquita to alter the games other than > a clear omen that the Gods
were displeased. I See no > mention of any omens, just a political
statement from > the pacifist viewpoint, one that is hardly in keeping
> with the Martial chachter of the Romans of Antiquita.

SCEPTIVS: Well, Senator, Ludis were a religious offer to the dead, and
we have just "turned" the Ludi into that. Politicals here has nothing
to be. Individual consciences and the will of not perverting the Ludi
with it was our intention.

> The idea that the Romans of old would alter the > content of the
games because of a war being waged by > two forigen nations, a war
that the Roman government > had declared it's neutrality in, is
completly > ahistoric.

SCEPTIVS: Sure, as slavery would be to-day. I repeat we bound
ourselves to that neutrality.

> If Nova Roma's neutrality is to be more than a sham, > no support
should be given to any macronational> political viewpoint during
offical Nova Roman events,> and that includes support for the so
called "peace> movement".

SCEPTIVS: I don't recognize a macronational country that supports this
viewpoint, Senator. We don't support any country with this; as you
could see, we are from Italy, Spain, countries whose governments
support the USA on this war, and we are on the way of neutrality
however because we are from Nova Roma.

> If citizens wish to support one macronational> political viewpoint
or another privatly, that is thier> right, but this support should NOT
become part of any> OFFICAL acts staged on behalf of Nova Roma, and
that> includes these games.

SCEPTIVS: As I said before, this is not a "macronational political
viewpoint" but a declaration of wills. I see respect has not been
observed and therefore I regret the manouvers for turning this into a
demagogic debate. Hopefully, I expect that citizens will say some
words on this issue.

vale bene,

L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 10:34:42 -0500

Salve, Franciscus Apulus Caesar -

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 11:02:44AM -0000, Franciscus Apulus Caesar wrote:
> Salve Senator,
>
> first of all, in our joint declaration we have asked to respect our
> action. It seems you don't want to do it.

_Asking_ for respect is, perhaps, one of the most pointless things
anyone can do. Respect is earned by actions and personal qualities,
something that was well recognized in AR (see the Roman Virtues.)

Odd as it may sound, there is at least one point here on which I agree
with Q. Fabius: neutrality means just that, *neutrality*. There are
people dying all over the world in wars, conflicts, accidents, and so
on. True neutrality would mean either recognizing and reacting to all of
these, or none of them. By focusing on the war in Iraq, your group has
abandoned neutrality and is expressing a particular and specific
interest.

> However we had a "brain storm" about the opportunity to organize
> violent Ludi. We all are for the peace and we feel this moment as a
> sad time for the people everywhere and of every Nations (Nova Roma
> too).

No one has asked for a "violent" Ludi as far as I'm aware. Normal and
unaffected by political statements is what I believe we all expected.

> Do you
> think the idea of the peace in a game is less important of the "real
> idea" about a "real event"?

If the game being played was hopscotch or tiddlywinks, representing war
as a background would be just as absurd as representing peace during a
war game. These are *war games*, intended as representations of violent
events. If you cannot represent those violent events, you don't have a
war game.

If you wished to change the games to something else - hopscotch or
tiddlywinks, perhaps - I would not wish to participate but I would have
no complaint (other than, perhaps, a mild comment that these are not
Roman-connected events.) As is, I would far prefer that you cancel or
reschedule the games instead of distorting them completely out of shape.

> So, this is our personal opinion, please respect it. If you don't
> respect it, you don't respect us and the ideas of others.

Saying this doesn't make it true. I can respect a person and dislike,
disrespect, etc. an idea that they hold. I would appreciate it if you
would stop trying to conflate these two things; most people find
communication difficult enough without false ideas such as these.

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur.
A friend in need is a friend indeed.
-- Ennius, quoted by Cicero.


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 10:54:20 -0500

Salve Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

What are you talking about? "Please do not put words in my statement"

I was responding to your statement that Tiberius Gracchus and his supporters
were

" politicians pure and simple who tried to manipulate the system for their
own gain."

the only inference one can draw from that statement is that their opponents,
the Senatorial oligarchy, were above being

"politicians pure and simple who tried to manipulate the system for their
own gain.".

If I have misinterpreted your statement then please correct me.

Do you agree that the Senate "optimates," were , in fact more responsible
for the fall of the Republic that any other group?

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Pauliunus

----- Original Message -----
From: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote

> Ave Ti. Galerius,
>
> Please do not put words in my statement. If you want to know my opinions,
please ask for them. I will be more than pleased to respond.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Stephen Gallagher
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
>
>
>
>
> Salve
>
> Sulla Wrote > "I view them as politicians pure and simple who tried to
> manipulate the system for their own gain."
>
> As opposed to the Conscript Fathers of the Roman Senate who only served
Rome
> and did only what was best for her, never doing anything for their own
ends.
>
>
> Except maybe a little
>
> SACRILEGIOUS JUDICIAL MURDER OF A TRIBUNE OF THE PEOPLE,
>
> I agree with Dr. Christopher Mackay Associate Professor in the
Department of
> History and Classics of the University of Alberta when he said
>
> It was the "optimates," the supporters of the ruling oligarchy, who felt
so
> threatened by Gracchus that they resorted to this violence. Eventually,
they
> would reap the rewards of this action, since they were to be the
principal
> victims of the violence. They killed Gracchus because they felt
threatened
> by his use of the powers of the concilium plebis against the will of the
> oligarchy. Gracchus' tribunate thus marks the first major example of the
> use, by a member of the oligarchy, of popular discontent to further his
own
> career. Gracchus stumbled into his conflict with the oligarchy
> unintentionally. The Republic was to be destroyed by members of the
> oligarchy who quite consciously tried to advance themselves to the
detriment
> of the Republican system.
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> 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 History
From:	MarcusAudens@webtv.net
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 11:01:47 -0500 (EST)

Master G. Iulius Scaurus;

Esteemed Sir;

While we have not been introduced formally, I must write you to tell you
how much I appreciate your historical insight and your willingness to
share the references that have, to some extent, supplied you wih your
information.

I am pleased indeed to see that you have not followed some others here
in decending into mundane and frivolous comment and argument, but have
rather contributed significantly to the historical view of Nova Roma and
Roman History. My thanks for your efforts. Yours is almost the only
messages that I read rather than scan, and I also appreciate very much
your obvious belief that you are not the answer-all to every comment and
situation here on this net.

While it is unlikely that I shall ever attain your clear expertise in
Roman History, your comments and references are certainly worthy of my
close attention, as well as insuring a growng bibliographical list of
referenes for my further study.

I should be honored to offer you a place in the Sodalitas Militarium as
a member or as a member of the Senior Staff. Your Scholarship would
greatly enhance, I believe, our efforts in this area.

Respectfully, and In Appreciation;

Marcus Minucius Audens
Praefectus Castorum -- Sodalitas Militarium -- Nova Roma

A wet sheet and a flowing sea, and a wind follows fast, and fills the
white and rustling sail, and bends the gallant mast; and bends the
gallant mast my boys while like the eagle free, our good ship starts and
flies and leaves old England on our lee------Fair Winds and following
Seas!!!


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 06:05:17 -0000


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 06:15:27 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, Quirites.

Can anyone tell whether there is any sort of Greek font that Yahoo
accepts as text? The way it displayed the quote from Polybius I
posted earlier made it look more like Martian than Greek on my screen.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 07:49:42 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus L. Cornelio Sullae Felici salutem dicit.

Salve, Luci Corneli.

Make that "the Tarpeian rock". I used to be able to think and type at
the same time...

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 10:17:49 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus Tiberio Galerio Paulino salutem dicit.

Salve, Tiberi Galeri.

I hope I did not incite bad feelings by a flippant historical
allusion. The assassinations of the Gracchi are but one part of a
complex set of conflicting and overlapping factions and problems in
the republican political economy. The brothers Gracchi were as much a
part of the oligarchy by birth as those who led their murders.
Indeed, one political fault line within that oligarchy was the between
circle of Scipio Aemilianus, who embraced Hellenistic culture and
Greek philosophy, and the circle of conservatives, associated with
their most vocal advocate, Cato the Elder, who decried Hellenism as a
threat to the mos maiorum. Recall that Tiberius Gracchus had the
support of other members of the Scipio Aemilianus circle throughout
his year as tribune, including the consul P. Mucius Scaevola, the
princeps senatus Ap. Claudius Pulcher (who was also Tiberius Gracchus'
father-in-law), and the pontifex P. Licinius Crassus Mucianus (who was
Scaevola's bother, adopted into the Licinii Crassi). This fault line
could also cross family lines: the instigator of Tiberius Gracchus'
murder was his cousin, P. Cornelius Scipio Nasica, and a critic of the
circle around Scipio Aemilianus. Into this infighting within a really
very small oligarchy came the two most pressing problems of the
republic in the last century of its existence. First, the enormous
profits made from ranching, and a ranching which depended on
technically-illegal grazing on the ager publicus and ager compascuus,
provided incentives for much of the Roman oligarchy to follow policies
which increasingly pushed peasants off the land and into Rome (keep in
mind the story Cicero recounts in _de officiis_ about Cato the Elder's
strong endorsement of ranching for best profits, and recall in which
of the oligarchic factions mentioned above Cato the Elder was). This
was accompanied by the increase in medium-sized farms owned by the
senatorial oligarchy which were more profitably worked by slaves,
originally from the Punic wars, later from the wars which arose from
expansion of Roman interests and ambitions in the Mediterranean world,
rather than free peasants, which, in turn, accelerated the movement of
peasants to the ranks of the urban poor (the huge, contiguous
slave-operated farms which came to be called latifundia don't really
emerge until the early imperial period, and, indeed, a large number of
oligarch-owned, medium-sized oligarch-owned farms all over Italy using
slave labor was even more damaging to the free peasantry than the
later latifundia would be). The second problem was the dependence of
the Roman army on small freeholders for military service. In the late
second century B.C.E. the demands of Mediterranean hegemony were being
felt every more strongly on the Roman military which had, as a result
of the economic forces described above, had fewer freeholding peasants
from whom troops could be recruited. T. Sempronius Gracchus realized
that a solution had to be found, and it is likely that the idea of
land reform as the solution arose in the circle around Scipio
Aemilianus, but this ran directly into the interests of those in the
oligarchy who were most profiting from ranching.

After the Gracchi a temporary solution was found in the Marian reforms
which admitted the capite censi to the army and the lex frumentaria to
prevent starvation of the urban poor, but this simply postponed the
crisis by forcing generals to use the threat of their soldiers to
obtain land from the ager publicus for soliders at discharge. And the
soldiers' realization that they would be able to receive land on
discharge only through the patronage of their commanders increasingly
shifted their loyalty to the commander rather than the Roman state.
This contributed to the series of de facto military dictatorships of
Marius, Sulla, the first triumvirate, Caesar, the second triumvirate,
and Augustus which eventually destroyed the republic itself.

This is a very sketchy survey of the history of the period, but I
think it points out that it was a genuine political-economic crisis of
the very institutions of the republic which the assassinations of the
Gracchi first really expose to history. It isn't a matter of good
populares and bad optimates; it is a matter of an oligarchy unable to
see the long-term consequences of pursuing their short-term
self-interest, and of the fact that the inability to identify real
solutions (which would have ultimately benefited most of the sides)
arose from the fact that some of those solutions would have genuinely
violated the mos maiorum.

There were other factors at play as well. One of them was the way the
Gracchi tended to use the concilium plebis to intrude into areas where
senatorial preeminence had been traditional -- specifically the
custody of foreign and fiscal policy (which was what sparked my joke
with Senator L. Cornelius Sulla Felix).

Certainly the murders of the Gracchi initiated a cascade of private
violence to obtain public policy which eventually destroyed the
republic, but the problems that led to that violence were real and
structural, not just personal.

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Sources on the Gracchi
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 11:44:02 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, Quirites.

In light of the discussion of the Sempronii Gracchi I thought it might
be useful to post some links to relevant online documents on the
history of this period:

First, the primary sources:

A translation of Appian's account of the Gracchi:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/appian-civwars1.html

Translations of Plutarchs' biographies of Tiberius and Gaius
Sempronius Gracchus respectively:
http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/tiberius.html
http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/gracchus.html

and a translation of Plutach's "The Comparison of Tiberius and Caius
Gracchus with Agis and Cleomenes":
http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/t_c_comp.html

For secondary literature:

A decent, if somewhat superficial, account of the events:
http://heraklia.fws1.com/contemporaries/gracchi/

Another good summary:
http://www.mccsc.edu/~blaw/Gracchi.htm

An interesting essay placing the Gracchi in the context of Roman
hegemony in the Mediterranean:
http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch16.htm

An excellent discussion of the brothers Gracchi with references:
http://abacus.bates.edu/~mimber/Rciv/2nd.cen2.htm

Charles McArver's "Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus: An Analysis of his
Statesmanship":
http://www.portergaud.edu/cmcarver/tsg.html

Christopher S. Mackay's excellent analysis of career of Gaius
Sempronius Gracchus:
http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLASS_366/C.Gracchus.1.html
and
http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLASS_366/C.Gracchus.2.html

And his analysis of career of Gaius Sempronius Gracchus:
http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLASS_366/Ti.Gracchus.1.html
and
http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLASS_366/Ti.Gracchus.2.html

>From another perspective, here's "Chapter 6: Poor Relief in Ancient
Rome" from Henry Hazlitt's 1973 _The Conquest of Poverty_:
http://www.hazlitt.org/e-texts/poverty/ch6.html

For course, these websites don't really compare to the scholarship of
the standard works on the Gracchi:

E. Badian, "Tiberius Gracchus and the Beginning of the Roman
Revolution" in Temporini, ed., _Aufsteig und Niedergang der
Ršmischen Welt_ (Berlin/New York, 1972).
A.H. Bernstein, _Tiberius Gracchus: Tradition and Apostacy_ (Ithaca,
m1978.
J. Briscoe, "Supporters and Opponents of Tiberius Gracchus," _Journal
of Roman Studies, 64 (1974).
P.A. Brunt, _Social Conflict in the Roman Republic_ (London, 1971).
D.C. Earl, _Tiberius Gracchus: A Study in Politics_ (Brussels, 1963).
A.W. Lintott, _Violence in Republican Rome (Oxford, 1968).
C. Nicolet, "L'Inspiration de Tiberius Gracchus," _Revue des Žtudes
anciennes_, 67 (1965).
H.H. Scullard, "Scipio Aemilianus and Roman Politics," _Journal of
Roman Studies, 50 (1960).
R. Seager, _The Crisis of the Roman Republic_ (Cambridge, 1969).
I. Shatzman, _Senatorial Wealth and Roman Politics_ (Brussels, 1975).
D. Stockton, _The Gracchi_ (Oxford, 1979).
A.J. Toynbee, _Hannibal's Legacy_ (Oxford, 1965).
C.A.Yeo, "The Development of Roman Plantation and Marketing of Farm
Products," _Finanzarchiv_, 13 (1952).

I hope this is helpful.

Valete, Quirites.

G. Iuslius Scaurus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] April Eagle
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 11:26:43 -0500

Salve Romans

Does anybody have anything for inclusion in the Bonus Eventus column for the April Eagle.

This is were where share the promotions, weddings, births, books being published, awards and degrees conferred etc,

you know the good stuff of life.

If anyone has something to include please send it to spqr753@msn.com

ASAP

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Curator Differum

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 12:09:49 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus Fr. Apulo Caesari Curuli Aedili salutem dicit.

Ave, Curulis Aedilis nobilis.

While I understand and support the sentiments you stated in the
decision not to include death and violence in the Ludi, I am also
moved by the words of Q. Fabius Maximus. I happen to be an American
macronational who deeply opposes my country's invasion of Iraq and I
recognize the depth and sensitivity of feelings on all sides.
However, I point out that the mos maiorum required gladiatorial
combats in honour of the dead and that these combats sometimes
involved deaths. Whether we honour the coalition dead or the Iraqi
dead, it is contrary to the mos maiorum to "sanitize," even for the
loftiest and most principled of reasons, funerary games. This is even
more so for the Ludi in honour of Magna Mater. The declaration of the
honourable Consules of the political neutrality of Nova Roma in a
macronational war should have no effect on the observations of the
Religio Romana. I respectfully ask that you consult the Collegium of
the Pontifices for a decision on whether modifying the Ludi in honour
of Magna Mater in this way may be impious. Please, noble Curule
Aedile, reconsider and do not let modern sensibilities overturn the
mos maiorum in the matter of these sacred games.

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 11:50:08 -0500

Salve G. Iulius Scaurus

"I hope I did not incite bad feelings by a flippant historical
allusion."

On the contrary I felt it allowed us the opportunity to discuss (as adults)
and learn more , about the start of the decline and fall of THE REPUBLIC.

I felt (and I could be wrong) that Sulla statement on the Gracchus was
trying to let the Senate ( Historic Roman Senate not the one in Nova Roma)
off the hook in terms of its responsibility for the decline and fall of the
Republic. I have read your message and agree with most of it. I have printed
it out to read it more carefully.

Maybe you could write your July article for the Eagle, on the causes of the
decline and fall of the Republic?

Seems like a timely topic.

Thanks for the response

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:17:20 -0800 (PST)

--- "L. Didius Geminus Sceptius" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
wrote:
SNIP
>
> SCEPTIVS: As I said before, this is not a
> "macronational political
> viewpoint" but a declaration of wills. I see respect
> has not been
> observed and therefore I regret the manouvers for
> turning this into a
> demagogic debate. Hopefully, I expect that citizens
> will say some
> words on this issue.
>
> vale bene,
>
> L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS
>
>

>From the Statement
"Not one scene of blood, or a murder or a dirty action

or "partial" comment will be written respecting the
soldiers in war and the innocent people under the
bombs."

That is clearly a political statement regarding the
current war. Attempting to bring your macronational
political views into the games, and trying to hide
from crictism behind vauge calls for "respect", leaves
no reson to respect you or the statement.

If you are going to make a political stand, then do so
openly, you will then get some respect along with the
disagreement.

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

Roman Citizen

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:19:39 -0500

Salve, G. Iulius Scaurus -

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 06:15:27AM -0000, Gregory Rose wrote:
> G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.
>
> Avete, Quirites.
>
> Can anyone tell whether there is any sort of Greek font that Yahoo
> accepts as text? The way it displayed the quote from Polybius I
> posted earlier made it look more like Martian than Greek on my screen.

Yahoo actually accepts whatever you send it as far as character sets go.
The way your browser displays what the text contains, however, is a
different story.

I assume that you have Greek fonts installed on your system (if you
don't, try a Web search for "spionic" or just let me know and I'll send
you a copy.) Search your browser's menus for "Language", "Character
coding" or something similar and set it to Greek.

By the way, your posts here have brought me great pleasure and have been
an excellent source of information. Thank you very much!

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Quod bonum, felix faustumque sit!
May it be good, fortunate and prosperous!
-- Words spoken when the Roman senate opened its session. Quoted by
Cicero in "De divitatione"


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration
From:	labienus@novaroma.org
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:34:41 US/Central

Salvete Quirites

I can applaud the intentions, if not the actions of the aediles in this
matter. I don't believe that the decision to make the games 'bloodless' was
prompted by macronational politics, and I think that any implication that this
is the case is due to the message having been written in English by one or more
non-native speakers of that language. Instead, it appears that they simply
want to have the games be a relief from, rather than an addition to, the
violence being broadcast to our TV sets non-stop by news outlets.

However, I don't think that tying this desire to the policy of neutrality that
my collega and I have decided to pursue is particularly valid. We have chosen
not to endorse any particular viewpoint about the war, and this is not the same
thing as stating an official policy of non-violence.

Additionally, and most importantly in my opinion, I have the same concerns
about impiety that Gaius Iulius has mentioned. The ludi are a sacred event and
we ought to interfere with them rarely, and then only with all due caution
after consulting with the Gods through the pontifices and augures. It's bad
enough that we're forced to stage them virtually. Down the road, when we can
hold real ludi, we will have to determine what is acceptable to our modern
sensibilities, the Gods, local laws, and so on. Until then, it seems best to
tamper as little as possible with the mos maiorum in this case.

Therefore, I urge the aediles and others who decided to make our virtual ludi
as bloodless in fiction as they are in fact to reconsider. The past ludi have
been both a lot of fun and fairly historical, and the violence described in
them has not been particularly horrific. Even with the unending stream of
images of war coming from the Middle East, I doubt that any Nova Roman will
find the kind of ludi we've had to date to be either unwelcome or disturbing.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Political Statements or just sensible words?
From:	"L. Didius Geminus Sceptius" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 21:01:17 +0200

Salvete omnes.

>>If you are going to make a political stand, then do so openly, you will then get some respect along with the disagreement.

SCEPTIVS: If I had to make a political statement referred to the current war, it wouldn't be here in this Forum just because it is not the accurate place to do so.
I have signed and support that Declaration because I do believe that my words can be distressing for those who suffer now or ever -if I take care of them. Much more nowdays, of course, but sensible and sensitive people as I do consider myself try to avoid painful words to those who can suffer from them.
I do not pretend anybody to agree with me on that, but just respect because CONCORDIA is one of the most beautiful virtues of Rome. It brought many conquers far away from battles.

Respectfully,

L·DIDIVS·GEMINVS·SCEPTIVS

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] RE: Racial prejudice in Rome - scattered thoughts
From:	Jim Lancaster <jlancaster@foxcable.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 11:36:58 -0800

Salvete Quirites:

I myself have not delved too deeply into this topic yet so I'm not in any
way an authority, but from my reading of Dio Cassius, writing ca. 220-230
CE, I found these little nuggets regarding the emperor known as "Caracalla"
(I'm taking these from the Lacus Curtius online edition, so the references
to the Loeb and other editions will vary):

"Antoninus belonged to three races; and he possessed none of their virtues
at all, but combined in himself all their vices; the fickleness, cowardice,
and recklessness of Gaul were his, the harshness and cruelty of Africa, and
the craftiness of Syria, whence he was sprung on his mother's side." (Dio
78.6)

"In everything he was very hot-headed and very fickle, and he furthermore
possessed the craftiness of his mother and the Syrians, to which race she
belonged." (Dio 78.10)

http://www.ukans.edu/history/index/europe/ancient_rome/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius
_Dio/78*.html

Oddly, Dio never describes Antoninus' mother, Julia Domna, as "crafty," but
that is his common epithet for her sister, Julia Maesa.

Now, Antoninus was born at Lugdunum, in Gaul, but has no Gallic blood in
him; perhaps the reference is to the fact that Domna used local Christian
wetnurses for him. He was about 8 months old or so when he left Gaul, and
never lived there again. The "African" blood was Punic on his father's
side; of Severus' mother little is known. The Berlin Tondo is a color
portrait of the family, showing Severus of much darker skin than Julia and
Antoninus (Geta has been purged), which is odd since Julia was almost
certainly an Arab of Bedouin origin; yet she is depicted very pale. Cassius
Dio himself was from Nicaea, in Asia Minor, and wrote in Greek. He seemed
very content to delineate character according to popular stereotypes, but
otherwise doesn't remark that either Severus or Domna were in any way less
Roman because of their provincial origin, or that Severus suffered in any
way by virtue of his darker skin, a fact that isn't mentioned at all in the
surviving text (which, admittedly, is spare and corrupt).

All of which is to say that while I don't doubt a color bar existed in some
fashion, it wasn't necessarily the same as the one that developed in the
modern world with exclusively-African slave trade. A barbarian was a
barbarian, whether blond or black, but "romanitas" was perhaps ultimately
more important than "origo."

And on a personal note, I am caucasian, and my best friend growing up was
Japanese-American, and I believe I was about 8 or 9 before I realized that
he looked "different" from me in any way. I simply didn't see it until it
was brought to my attenion. Before then, if asked, I would have said "he
looks just like me, but husky." Perhaps it was the same to others in
earlier times: you had to be carefully taught....

Valete!

CN IVLIVS STRABO


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:07:00 -0800

Ave Ti. Galerius,

My statement only focused on the discussion at hand which was only about Tribune Ti. Sermpronius. Granted it was starting to increase in scope but my comments were strictly about him. Your "inferance" of my statement was strictly your own and not mine. Your application of your "inference" to my statement is what I disagreed with and is exactly why I asked you not to put words into my posts or statements. As I have stated before if you would like my opinion please feel free to ask me but do not infer as to what I think.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen Gallagher
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote

Salve Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

What are you talking about? "Please do not put words in my statement"

I was responding to your statement that Tiberius Gracchus and his supporters
were

" politicians pure and simple who tried to manipulate the system for their
own gain."

the only inference one can draw from that statement is that their opponents,
the Senatorial oligarchy, were above being

"politicians pure and simple who tried to manipulate the system for their
own gain.".

If I have misinterpreted your statement then please correct me.

Do you agree that the Senate "optimates," were , in fact more responsible
for the fall of the Republic that any other group?

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Pauliunus

----- Original Message -----
From: "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote

> Ave Ti. Galerius,
>
> Please do not put words in my statement. If you want to know my opinions,
please ask for them. I will be more than pleased to respond.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Stephen Gallagher
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
>
>
>
>
> Salve
>
> Sulla Wrote > "I view them as politicians pure and simple who tried to
> manipulate the system for their own gain."
>
> As opposed to the Conscript Fathers of the Roman Senate who only served
Rome
> and did only what was best for her, never doing anything for their own
ends.
>
>
> Except maybe a little
>
> SACRILEGIOUS JUDICIAL MURDER OF A TRIBUNE OF THE PEOPLE,
>
> I agree with Dr. Christopher Mackay Associate Professor in the
Department of
> History and Classics of the University of Alberta when he said
>
> It was the "optimates," the supporters of the ruling oligarchy, who felt
so
> threatened by Gracchus that they resorted to this violence. Eventually,
they
> would reap the rewards of this action, since they were to be the
principal
> victims of the violence. They killed Gracchus because they felt
threatened
> by his use of the powers of the concilium plebis against the will of the
> oligarchy. Gracchus' tribunate thus marks the first major example of the
> use, by a member of the oligarchy, of popular discontent to further his
own
> career. Gracchus stumbled into his conflict with the oligarchy
> unintentionally. The Republic was to be destroyed by members of the
> oligarchy who quite consciously tried to advance themselves to the
detriment
> of the Republican system.
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
>


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:30:23 -0800

Ave Ti. Galerius,

For the record my statments regarding this convesation did not include any comments about the Senate or its members role in the assassination of Tribune Ti. Sermpronius. My comments were strictly made about the Tribune. I was not trying to apologize the Senate's or its members role in the assassination of the Tribune.

Respectfully,

Sulla
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen Gallagher
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of the last Senate Vote

Salve G. Iulius Scaurus

"I hope I did not incite bad feelings by a flippant historical
allusion."

On the contrary I felt it allowed us the opportunity to discuss (as adults)
and learn more , about the start of the decline and fall of THE REPUBLIC.

I felt (and I could be wrong) that Sulla statement on the Gracchus was
trying to let the Senate ( Historic Roman Senate not the one in Nova Roma)
off the hook in terms of its responsibility for the decline and fall of the
Republic. I have read your message and agree with most of it. I have printed
it out to read it more carefully.

Maybe you could write your July article for the Eagle, on the causes of the
decline and fall of the Republic?

Seems like a timely topic.

Thanks for the response

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:32:43 -0800

True, but if the mailing list is not set to accept attachments they will not show up, at least on those lists that prohibit html.

Respectfully,

Sulla
----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo

Salve, G. Iulius Scaurus -

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 06:15:27AM -0000, Gregory Rose wrote:
> G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.
>
> Avete, Quirites.
>
> Can anyone tell whether there is any sort of Greek font that Yahoo
> accepts as text? The way it displayed the quote from Polybius I
> posted earlier made it look more like Martian than Greek on my screen.

Yahoo actually accepts whatever you send it as far as character sets go.
The way your browser displays what the text contains, however, is a
different story.

I assume that you have Greek fonts installed on your system (if you
don't, try a Web search for "spionic" or just let me know and I'll send
you a copy.) Search your browser's menus for "Language", "Character
coding" or something similar and set it to Greek.

By the way, your posts here have brought me great pleasure and have been
an excellent source of information. Thank you very much!

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Quod bonum, felix faustumque sit!
May it be good, fortunate and prosperous!
-- Words spoken when the Roman senate opened its session. Quoted by
Cicero in "De divitatione"


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	Michel Loos <loos@qt1.iq.usp.br>
Date:	04 Apr 2003 17:57:31 -0300

Em Sex, 2003-04-04 às 17:32, L. Cornelius Sulla escreveu:
> True, but if the mailing list is not set to accept attachments they will not show up, at least on those lists that prohibit html.
>

No need for attachment: unicode-UTF8 passes well through normal e-mail,
and near to every language is displayed correctly (at least
greek/japanese/cyrillic etc work well), of course if utf-8 is installed
on your computer.

Manius Villius Limitanus

> Respectfully,
>
> Sulla
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 9:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
>
>
> Salve, G. Iulius Scaurus -
>
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 06:15:27AM -0000, Gregory Rose wrote:
> > G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.
> >
> > Avete, Quirites.
> >
> > Can anyone tell whether there is any sort of Greek font that Yahoo
> > accepts as text? The way it displayed the quote from Polybius I
> > posted earlier made it look more like Martian than Greek on my screen.
>
> Yahoo actually accepts whatever you send it as far as character sets go.
> The way your browser displays what the text contains, however, is a
> different story.
>
> I assume that you have Greek fonts installed on your system (if you
> don't, try a Web search for "spionic" or just let me know and I'll send
> you a copy.) Search your browser's menus for "Language", "Character
> coding" or something similar and set it to Greek.
>
> By the way, your posts here have brought me great pleasure and have been
> an excellent source of information. Thank you very much!
>
>
> Vale,
> Caius Minucius Scaevola
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Quod bonum, felix faustumque sit!
> May it be good, fortunate and prosperous!
> -- Words spoken when the Roman senate opened its session. Quoted by
> Cicero in "De divitatione"
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> 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/
>
--
Michel Loos <loos@qt1.iq.usp.br>


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] G. Iulius Scaurus L. Cornelio Sullae Felici salutem dicit.
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:57:30 -0800

G. Iulius Scaurus L. Cornelio Sullae Felici salutem dicit.

Salve, Luci Corneli.

Scripsisti:

> Yes, I am aware of the precedent that Tribune T. Sempronius was
setting during his >tenure as Tribune of the Plebs, as you can
probably tell by my Roman name, I do not >hold the Sempronii in the
highest esteem. I view them as politicans pure and simple who >tried
to manipulate the system for their own gain.

I confess that I assumed that someone who chose the name "Lucius
Cornelius Sulla Felix" probably wasn't too sympathetic to the
popularis tendency in Republican politics (but, then, I probably
wouldn't have chosen to be a Iulian if I didn't have popularis
tendencies :-).

Sulla: I understand, I came to much the same conclusion with your name as well. :)

I dissent on the matter of the Sempronii Gracchi.

Sulla: I understand

If the senatorial aristocracy had recognized how baleful the consequences
of not dealing with the problems of land reform and the urban poor
would be in the ensuing century, effectively destroying the republic
and paving the way for autocracy, simple self-interest should have led
them to compromise with the Gracchi. Unfortunately men are seldom so
farsighted.

Sulla: In this I agree with you. Men are seldom so farsighted when they are interested in their own financial standing and trying to increase their wealth. And as we know in ancient Rome men were very much driven by increasing their wealth as it had a tendency to enhance their dignatas and auctoritas and many men at that time felt that was equal in importance to the needs of the government.

As just a matter of personal opinion, I think that Rome
would have been much better off if both Marius and Sulla had been
thrown from the Tarquinian rock for daring to bring troops across the
pomerium for their own political ends,

Sulla: I understand, but on the flip side of the coin is that where would Rome have been without G. Marius and his military reforms or L. Cornelius Sulla Felix Dictator and his consolidations and governmental and legal reforms as well.

but historians deal with the
world as it was, not as we'd prefer it had been (ah, if Decius hadn't
decided to fight the Goths in a swamp... or if Diocletian hadn't
retired as Augustus... or if Julian had sent Sallustius Secundus to
deal with the Sassinids and stayed home to pursue his domestic agenda...).

Sulla: I agree. If we were able to turn back the clock we would have tried to set up a utopia, but as we all know that is simply not possible. Instead we can only dissect and learn from the mistakes of the past.

> I also recommend Mommsen's work on the Late Roman Republic and
Scullard's From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 BC to
68 AD as well.

Mommsen was a giant on whose shoulders modern Roman historiography
stands, although he did have the prejudices of his generation and
there's been a great deal more research (and enormously more
archaeological and epigraphic evidence discovered) since he wrote.

Sulla: True, but his work is a masterpiece and is still highly readible even with the discoveries that have been made. I cannot recommend him enough.

I use Scullard as a main text when I teach Roman history; even though I
disagree with some of his conclusions, I've not found a better or more
readable introduction to the period in English.

Sulla: Yes, I understand. I own quite a few of Scullard's works they are very good introductory works.

It's a great pleasure to be discussing historia romana rather than
historia musicae novae pulsandi cum verbis.

Sulla: I agree it is a pleasure but one cannot discount the deviations at times like in the subject matter of historia musicae novae pulsandi cum verbis. :) They all have a place!

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix

Vale.

G. Iulius Scaurus

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Respect (WAS: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration)
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=" <cordus@strategikon.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 22:05:32 +0100 (BST)

A. Apollonius Cordus to all citizens and peregrines,
greetings.

I do not propose to say anything about whether the
decision taken by the Aediles was right or wrong, and
still less do I wish to discuss their motivations in
making it. I do, however, feel moved to comment on the
question of 'respect' which has arisen during the
discussion.

Senator Sinicius Drusus suggested that respect must be
earned by one's actions. I would certainly agree that
honest and creditable words and deeds earn respect,
and rightly so, and I hasten to say that every person
who has participated in this discussion so far has my
respect on this account.

I would suggest, however, that a certain level of
respect is due to every person on account of their
humanity alone. Moreover, even if one does not
consider humanity to be an attribute deserving of any
particular respect, I would submit that to show
respect to others is both to increase the respect in
which one is oneself held and to act in a way most
consonant with human dignity.

More importantly in the present circumstances, I must
say that there are circumstances in which individuals
are to be respected without being required to do
anything to earn that respect, and one of those
circumstances is the holding of office in our
republic. When the sovereign people have assembled to
elect a citizen to public office, then that citizen is
invested with the dignity and weight not just of a
private citizen and human being, but of the republic
itself. He has been honoured by the populace, and is
for that reason alone to be honoured and respected.
What does it mean to honour a magistrate with rank and
title, and permit him to be preceded by lictors, and
require him to swear a sacred oath, if we do not show
him the respect his office deserves?

A magistrate may not be right, and when he is wrong
our duty is to correct him; he may not be just, and
when he is unjust it is our duty to point out his
injustice; but he is always our elected officer, and
it is our duty to treat him with respect.

I do not accuse anyone, nor do I reprimand, and if I
seem to do so I apologize. I also apologize if I seem
pompous: I ask you to ignore my inelegance and
consider my sentiment, and I hope you will find it
truthful.

Cordus

=====

www.strategikon.org

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] The Gracchi and the end of the Republic
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=" <cordus@strategikon.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 22:15:56 +0100 (BST)

A. Apollonius Cordus to all citizens and peregrines,
greetings.

I've been enjoying this discussion, and I can't resist
joining in with a thought which has just entered my
mind.

Since the sack of Rome in AD 410 and even before that
it has been said by followers of the ancient Roman
religion that the fall of the Roman Empire in the West
was the result of neglect of the gods and sometimes
more specifically of the removal of the altar of
Victory from the Senate-house or the extinguishing of
the flame of Vesta. But I'm not aware that anyone has
ever made an explicit religious connexion between the
fall of the Republic and the murder of a succession of
Tribunes, beginning with Ti. Sempronius Gracchus,
while still in office and therefore sacrosanct of
person.

I would be fasctinated to know whether this suggestion
has ever been made, and whether any practioners of the
religion or especially any pontiffs would support it
(I'm not a theist myself, so I would tend to seek more
humanistic causes, but I'm always interested to hear
theological ideas of history).

Cordus

=====

www.strategikon.org

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 16:27:35 -0500

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 12:32:43PM -0800, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> True, but if the mailing list is not set to accept attachments they
> will not show up, at least on those lists that prohibit html.

It wasn't an attachment; it was simply a part of the post body.

By the way, could you please snip the posts that you're responding to
down to the relevant text, as is requested in the list policy? Thanks in
advance.

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Imperium et libertas.
Empire and liberty.
-- Benjamin Disraeli; from Cicero and Tacitus


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 16:29:37 -0500

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 05:57:31PM -0300, Michel Loos wrote:
> Em Sex, 2003-04-04 ?s 17:32, L. Cornelius Sulla escreveu:
> > True, but if the mailing list is not set to accept attachments they
> > will not show up, at least on those lists that prohibit html.
> >
>
> No need for attachment: unicode-UTF8 passes well through normal e-mail,
> and near to every language is displayed correctly (at least
> greek/japanese/cyrillic etc work well), of course if utf-8 is installed
> on your computer.

Good point. In Linux, Mozilla at least comes set up this way by default
and requires no tweaking to display a number of other languages.

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes.
It is foolish to fear what you cannot avoid.
-- Cicero, "De officiis"


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Quote of the day:
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 22:06:11 +0100 (BST)

-----Original Message-----
>From : Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
>
>*That* sounds like straight-out racism. Would you care to explain why
>you chose to insult a group of people based on the color of their skin,
>or would you just prefer to apologize?
>
Who's supposed to be insulted by what?

Caesariensis

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

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] About the Aedilian controversy
From:	"curiobritannicus" <Marcusaemiliusscaurus@hotmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 21:53:58 -0000

Salvete omnes,

I have decided to add myself to the many people commenting on the
controversial statement made by the Curule Aediles and their Cohors.

I'm not going to comment on who is right about whether our neutrality
has been properly observed, or whether violent games are needed to
sate our clearly bloodthirsty crowds (j/k).

Instead, I just want to point out that this argument seems to have
little point. Can't we all just enjoy the Ludi? Instead, one side
of the argument is accusing the other of making political statements
and platforms, while the other side accuses the first of being
demagogic.

I understand that the current war is a sensitive subject, but we
shouldn't be having arguments about such inconsequential subjects.
(Not the war, but whether the Curule Aedile's statement was against
our neutrality.) Or indeed whether letting war affect Ludi is
historical, as we've had the argument of to what extent we should
adhere to historical accuracy many times before.

**His speech done, Curio holds out the olive branch to all involved.**

Bene valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Respect (WAS: MEGALESIA LUDI: Joint Declaration)
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 16:55:08 -0500

Salve, A. Apollonius Cordus!

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 10:05:32PM +0100, A. Apollonius Cordus wrote:
>
> Senator Sinicius Drusus suggested that respect must be
> earned by one's actions.

Actually, that was me.

> I would suggest, however, that a certain level of
> respect is due to every person on account of their
> humanity alone.

And I agree completely - but that degree of respect (at least in my
opinion) is not something that can be gratuitously leveraged to silence
opposing opinion. Furthermore, I do not see that respect can or should
_ever_ be used as a means of gagging someone.

> Moreover, even if one does not
> consider humanity to be an attribute deserving of any
> particular respect, I would submit that to show
> respect to others is both to increase the respect in
> which one is oneself held and to act in a way most
> consonant with human dignity.

I would have to disagree here. Showing respect to someone who does not
deserve it is something that I consider deeply dishonest, and alien to
my concept of dignity. I note that the above is often stated as an
example of a proper way *for others* to behave, but I cannot say that
I've ever seen it practiced in reality.

> More importantly in the present circumstances, I must
> say that there are circumstances in which individuals
> are to be respected without being required to do
> anything to earn that respect, and one of those
> circumstances is the holding of office in our
> republic.

I must strongly disagree with this. Respect does not equal duty; I am no
more able to give my respect where I do not feel it than to pull the
moon down from the sky. Likewise, I am just as unable to withhold it
when I do feel it. There are laws that I must obey and forms that I must
follow when I'm dealing with an elected official in an official context;
this does not mean that they have my respect.

> What does it mean to honour a magistrate with rank and
> title, and permit him to be preceded by lictors, and
> require him to swear a sacred oath, if we do not show
> him the respect his office deserves?

Whether the man in the office is respected or not is not the issue in
the above statement; I could cite a number of politicians right here at
home who hold high office but deserve little beyond contempt. However,
the office they hold requires a certain duty from both the office holder
and the people.

> A magistrate may not be right, and when he is wrong
> our duty is to correct him; he may not be just, and
> when he is unjust it is our duty to point out his
> injustice; but he is always our elected officer, and
> it is our duty to treat him with respect.

Given the above definition of "respect" and the way that the request for
respect was worded, you would have neither the right to correct him nor
to point out the injustice. <irony>How can a respected magistrate be
unjust, anyway?</irony>

> I do not accuse anyone, nor do I reprimand, and if I
> seem to do so I apologize. I also apologize if I seem
> pompous: I ask you to ignore my inelegance and
> consider my sentiment, and I hope you will find it
> truthful.

I've always found your posts thoughtful and thought-provoking, myself. I
may not always agree, but I'm always interested in reading what you have
to say.

Optime Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Longum iter est per praecepta, breve et efficax per exempla.
The way is made long through rules, but short and effective through examples.
-- Seneca Philosophus, "Epistulae"


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 2003 14:19:19 -0800

Considering you are the first person to complain (privately or publically), I will take it under advisement.
However, I do tend to favor posts that have included the past 1 or two posts they are responding to in the thread as opposed to a Sign line that is longer than the persons actual post.

Vale,

Sulla
----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Greek fonts on Yahoo

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 12:32:43PM -0800, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> True, but if the mailing list is not set to accept attachments they
> will not show up, at least on those lists that prohibit html.

It wasn't an attachment; it was simply a part of the post body.

By the way, could you please snip the posts that you're responding to
down to the relevant text, as is requested in the list policy? Thanks in
advance.

Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Imperium et libertas.
Empire and liberty.
-- Benjamin Disraeli; from Cicero and Tacitus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: The Gracchi and the end of the Republic
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2003 22:54:39 -0000

Salve,

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "A. Apollonius Cordus"
<cordus@s...> wrote:
> A. Apollonius Cordus to all citizens and peregrines,

<snipped>

>But I'm not aware that anyone has
> ever made an explicit religious connexion between the
> fall of the Republic and the murder of a succession of
> Tribunes, beginning with Ti. Sempronius Gracchus,
> while still in office and therefore sacrosanct of
> person.

<snipped>

Salve,

Interesting connection to say the least. I'll leave the theological
implications to those more versed in the Religio. Aside from the
theological implications there is a clear psychological message that
comes with the assassination for Ti. Sempronius Gracchus: "If the
sacrosanct person of a Tribune can be killed for political reasons,
then there are no limits to what can be done for political reasons."
Would Marius and later Sulla marched on Rome violating the sacred
pomerium had not the psychological barrier of the sacrosanct nature
of the Tribune been demolished?

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus