Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 00:02:32 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Quintus Lanius Paulinus"
<mjk@d...> wrote:
> Salvete omnes,
>
> Our tax department, Revenue Canada as well as the IRS in the USA,
may
> the dogs gnaw their bones, go by the day your tax returns are post
> marked. They say as long as the return has been stamped before
> midnight on the 15 of April in the US and 30 of April in Canada,
then
> the returns are counted as on time. If not you face stiff
penalties.
> Is that not an understanding in NR?
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus
>

That is not my understanding of the word remittance, which is the
word used in the Edict. When I get my cable bill it says due by such
and such a date. If the cable company does not receive remittance on
that date I will have snow on my TV (and as I have a cable modem no
internet as well) even if it is postmarked that date. Same with my
electric bill and gas bill, no matter what the postmark on the
envelope if they don't have their money on or before the due date I
can fully expect to be sitting in a dark room trying to cook supper
with a candle.

Q. Cassius Calvus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 17:05:10 -0700

Ave!

If I recall correctly that is how it was observed last year.

Respectfully,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Quintus Lanius Paulinus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 4:52 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi


Salvete omnes,

Our tax department, Revenue Canada as well as the IRS in the USA, may
the dogs gnaw their bones, go by the day your tax returns are post
marked. They say as long as the return has been stamped before
midnight on the 15 of April in the US and 30 of April in Canada, then
the returns are counted as on time. If not you face stiff penalties.
Is that not an understanding in NR?

Quintus Lanius Paulinus



>
> Honorable Consul,
>
> That is not what your Edict states. Your Edict states; "The tax
> deadline is the last day of Aprilis. Taxes may be remitted after
that
> date, with a penalty of an extra 50%. Exempli gratia, a civis who
> owes $12 would need to pay $18 after the deadline. "
>
> The Edict makes no mention of postmarks. It merely states that
Taxes
> remitted after that date... In my line of work remittance means
> cash/check in hand, not postmarked by.
>
> I really want to believe this is not yet another case of changing
the
> rules when the current ones become an incovenience and that you
> overlooked mentioning the postmark. I'm willing to give the
benefit
> of the doubt.
>
> Vale,
>
> Q. Cassius Calvus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Taxes
From:	"Jill" <jademermaid@aol.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 00:15:42 -0000

I am a fresh newbie, so perhaps I'm out on line in speaking here, but
I hate to see people argue about something so simple. I sent in my
application to Nova Roma on April 28th, and I also paid the tax. (Not
so sure how that's going to work, since I can't check my status until
my citizenship is approved)

Maybe I'm just an overachiever, but it seems to me you get out what
you put in to anything. If folks in higher positions cannot pay the
tax, then they should lose their status, because that is the law/rule
that was made. Maybe they can get re-elected next year and
appreciate their position well enough to arrange to have their taxes
taken care of before the deadline.

Perhaps that seems harsh. If that is the case, then issue a grace
period to the law that gives an extra week for those who simply must
wait until the last minute. But that would have to go into effect
next year. This deadline is up.

Violentilla (pending)
just a peasant, a peon. But one of the (hopefully future) people.

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Constitutional Law Question
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org>
Date:	Fri, 02 May 2003 20:03:18 -0500

Salvete Tiberi Galeri omnesque,

> I have a question on Nova Roman Constitutional Law. Does the Veto
> held by the magistrates pertain only to official acts of other
> magistrates or can they veto the actions of an individual citizens.

The intercessio of most magistrates only applies to the actions of
magistratus. The intercessio of the tribuni plebis extends to include
senatusconsulta.

Note that any magistratus with imperium or the power to issue edicta can
conceivably compel a civis to refrain from some action, though quite
probably at the risk of intercessio from the tribuni plebis.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
May pre house the seamy side volitation!!!

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org>
Date:	Fri, 02 May 2003 20:13:36 -0500

Salvete Quinti Cassi omnesque

> The Edict makes no mention of postmarks. It merely states that Taxes
> remitted after that date... In my line of work remittance means
> cash/check in hand, not postmarked by.

Then we are in different lines of work. To me, remittance means simply
the sending of money to someone at a distance. That is all I meant by
the word, and I have been telling those that have asked that a postmark
dated before the deadline is sufficient for over a month now.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
May pre house the seamy side volitation!!!

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 22:15:02 -0400

Salve yes I did ,in fact last year I paid for two years which I think would
technicality make me the first citizen to pay this years tax!!!

Everybody should pay your taxes.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Curator Differum et Quaestor
Citizen and Tax Payer

----- Original Message -----
From: "quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 7:30 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi


> Salve,
>
> How can the ordinary citizen be expected to pay their taxes when
> office holders and Senators do not? The following officals covered
> under the Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti Censi have not paid their
> taxes as of May 1, 2003 and in accordance with the Lex Vedia Assidui
> et Capiti Censi are no longer eligible to hold office (Link:
> http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2001-05-20-i.html:
>
> Flaverius Galerius Aurelianus Secundus, Accensus of the Sr. Consul's
> Cohors
>
> Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus, Plebian Aedile
>
> Quintius Sertorius, PROPRAETOR Canada Occidentalis
>
> Appius Tullius Marcellus Cato, PROPRAETOR Canada Orientalis
>
> Senator Marcus Arminius Maior, PROPRAETOR Brasilia
>
> Senator Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura, PROPRAETOR Australia
>
> Vale,
>
> Q. Cassius Calvus
> (I paid my taxes, did you?)
>
>
>
>
>
> 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: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 02:18:47 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Fortunatus <labienus@n...> wrote:
> Salvete Quinti Cassi omnesque
>
> > The Edict makes no mention of postmarks. It merely states that
Taxes
> > remitted after that date... In my line of work remittance means
> > cash/check in hand, not postmarked by.

> Then we are in different lines of work. To me, remittance means
simply
> the sending of money to someone at a distance. That is all I meant
by
> the word, and I have been telling those that have asked that a
postmark
> dated before the deadline is sufficient for over a month now.

Accounts Receivable. So for me, remittance means I have cash,
check, money order in my hot little hands ready for posting. Ok,
usually not cash since the cheapest thing we sell is about $1500.00
so its not like we get a lot of cash and carry purchases.

Q. Cassius Calvus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 22:26:04 -0400

Salve

You go Cousin.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus


----- Original Message -----
From: <PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi


> F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to Q. Cassius Calvus. Salve.
>
> I mailed my original check on 4/07/03 with an SAS postcard enclosed to the
P.O. Box in Maine. I did not receive a response but investigated with the
proper magistrates. No record of my check was found. I have mailed a new
check. I do not use PayPal. Respectfully. F Gal Aur Sec.
>
>
> 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: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 23:01:16 -0400

Salve -

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 08:13:36PM -0500, Fortunatus wrote:
> Salvete Quinti Cassi omnesque
>
> > The Edict makes no mention of postmarks. It merely states that Taxes
> > remitted after that date... In my line of work remittance means
> > cash/check in hand, not postmarked by.
>
> Then we are in different lines of work. To me, remittance means simply
> the sending of money to someone at a distance. That is all I meant by
> the word, and I have been telling those that have asked that a postmark
> dated before the deadline is sufficient for over a month now.

>From Webster's dictionary:

Remittance \Re*mit"tance\ (r?-m?t"tans), n.
1. The act of transmitting money, bills, or the like, esp. to
a distant place, as in satisfaction of a demand, or in
discharge of an obligation.
[1913 Webster]

2. The sum or thing remitted. --Addison.
[1913 Webster]

--- [from wn] ---
remittance
n : a payment of money sent to a person in another place [syn: {remittal},
{remission}, {remitment}]

It seems that the law agrees with your definition; transmission, not
reception is how "remittance" is defined. I'm not particularly excited
about the fact that NR officials get special treatment and privileges,
such as L. Cornelius Sulla mentioned (the magistrates taxes being paid
for them if they neglect to do so, etc. - the average citizen does not
have this done for them!), but if the law says "remittance", then that's
what it means.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Alea iacta est!
Let the dice fly!
-- Julius Caesar, at the Rubicon

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 20:58:55 -0700

Ave,

For the record, you must have missed a later post in which I clearly pointed that that the Gens Cornelia does have a system in place that if there are members within our gens, others who can, may be able to pay for your taxes.

So, citizens who are not magistrates are able to have some financial assistance, but I guess it would depend on how each Gentes chooses to conduct their own affairs.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi


Salve -

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 08:13:36PM -0500, Fortunatus wrote:
> Salvete Quinti Cassi omnesque
>
> > The Edict makes no mention of postmarks. It merely states that Taxes
> > remitted after that date... In my line of work remittance means
> > cash/check in hand, not postmarked by.
>
> Then we are in different lines of work. To me, remittance means simply
> the sending of money to someone at a distance. That is all I meant by
> the word, and I have been telling those that have asked that a postmark
> dated before the deadline is sufficient for over a month now.

From Webster's dictionary:

Remittance \Re*mit"tance\ (r?-m?t"tans), n.
1. The act of transmitting money, bills, or the like, esp. to
a distant place, as in satisfaction of a demand, or in
discharge of an obligation.
[1913 Webster]

2. The sum or thing remitted. --Addison.
[1913 Webster]

--- [from wn] ---
remittance
n : a payment of money sent to a person in another place [syn: {remittal},
{remission}, {remitment}]

It seems that the law agrees with your definition; transmission, not
reception is how "remittance" is defined. I'm not particularly excited
about the fact that NR officials get special treatment and privileges,
such as L. Cornelius Sulla mentioned (the magistrates taxes being paid
for them if they neglect to do so, etc. - the average citizen does not
have this done for them!), but if the law says "remittance", then that's
what it means.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Alea iacta est!
Let the dice fly!
-- Julius Caesar, at the Rubicon

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org>
Date:	Fri, 02 May 2003 22:55:49 -0500

Salvete Cai Minuci omnesque

> I'm not particularly excited about the fact that NR officials get special
> treatment and privileges, such as L. Cornelius Sulla mentioned (the
> magistrates taxes being paid for them if they neglect to do so, etc. - the
> average citizen does not have this done for them!)

That was the policy under L Cornelius Sulla's administration. There has
been no policy to that effect made by the current administration. Had
we done as M Octavius and L Cornelius did, it is quite likely that
nobody would have known about it. Certainly, Q Cassius wouldn't have
discovered any non-paying magistratus to complain about.

To be fully truthful, I have paid for one civis outside of my familia.
C Equitius Renatus contacted me to say that he might have trouble paying
because he is currently in Iraq. I told him not to worry about it, and
have paid his taxes for him. I did this as a kindness from one civis to
another, as well as out of respect for his paterfamilias. It was not a
result of policy.

> ...but if the law says "remittance", then that's what it means.

That's what it says and that's what it means in accordance with my
interpretation of the word, for every civis. I have not altered my
policy for anyone. I have done my best to help everyone who had a
problem, magistratus or otherwise, and I have tried to maintain a policy
which is legal and in which those who made a fair effort to pay on time
aren't penalized by the deficiencies of our system.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
May pre house the seamy side volitation!!!

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 00:12:19 -0400

Ave -

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 08:58:55PM -0700, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> Ave,
>
> For the record, you must have missed a later post in which I clearly
> pointed that that the Gens Cornelia does have a system in place that
> if there are members within our gens, others who can, may be able to
> pay for your taxes.

I saw that post as well. This is perhaps a laudable thing within a Gens;
I cannot say that I disapprove of the policy, as it would (in my
opinion) cause a significantly higher percentage of the members to pay
their taxes. However, I'm certain that all magistrates do not belong to
the Gens Cornelia - and call your attention to the meaning of the word
"privilege", which is the term I used.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Hoc coactus sum.
To this, I am forced and compelled.
(According to legend, a secret reservation written by bishop Hans Brask of
Link?ping and hidden under his seal on a document he was reluctant to sign.)

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 21:23:58 -0700

Ave,

As a citizen of Nova Roma, I make sure my taxes are paid. As Paterfamilias
it is my duty to make certain that I organize a way to have as many
Cornelians pay their taxes, if they are not able to pay for it themselves.
I am not responsible for the actions of every other citizen of Nova Roma,
and it is not my responsibilty to find a way to pay for their taxes either.
It is up to them to pay for their taxes or to find other methods to make
certain their taxes are paid.

All magistrates and citizens have had over 90 days to submit their payment
to Nova Roma. It is up to them to plan its payment (if it is a financial
expense), or set up a method of getting those funds here.

Besides, its not like this was the first year a tax has been implmented
(that was last year).

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: "Caius Minucius Scaevola" <ben@callahans.org>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi


> Ave -
>
> On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 08:58:55PM -0700, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> > Ave,
> >
> > For the record, you must have missed a later post in which I clearly
> > pointed that that the Gens Cornelia does have a system in place that
> > if there are members within our gens, others who can, may be able to
> > pay for your taxes.
>
> I saw that post as well. This is perhaps a laudable thing within a Gens;
> I cannot say that I disapprove of the policy, as it would (in my
> opinion) cause a significantly higher percentage of the members to pay
> their taxes. However, I'm certain that all magistrates do not belong to
> the Gens Cornelia - and call your attention to the meaning of the word
> "privilege", which is the term I used.
>
>
> Vale,
> Caius Minucius Scaevola
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Hoc coactus sum.
> To this, I am forced and compelled.
> (According to legend, a secret reservation written by bishop Hans Brask of
> Link?ping and hidden under his seal on a document he was reluctant to
sign.)
>
>
> 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] Another Viewpoint on Taxes
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 04:51:34 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Given today's discussion of taxes, here's a link to some important
papyrological evidence of how Roman taxes worked in Egypt, "The
Archive of Gaius Apolinarius Niger":

http://www.lib.umich.edu/pap/snapshots/Niger/G_A_Niger1.html

And related essay with photos of the excavation and a number of its
finds, Elaine K. Gazda's "Karanis, an Egyptian Town in Roman Times:
Discoveries of the University of Michigan Expedition to Egypt
(1924-1935)":

http://www.umich.edu/~kelseydb/Exhibits/Karanis83/KaranisExcavation/KaranisExcavation.html

And a site with more images of artifacts from Karanis, "Karanis Online":

http://www.umich.edu/~kelseydb/OutKaranis.html

And, finally, images from an exhibition of textiles from Karanis, "The
Fabric of Everyday Life":

http://www.lsa.umich.edu/kelsey/galleries/Exhibits/textiles/classroom/

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Another Viewpoint on Taxes
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 04:52:31 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, Quirites.

Given today's discussion of taxes, here's a link to some important
papyrological evidence of how Roman taxes worked in Egypt, "The
Archive of Gaius Apolinarius Niger":

http://www.lib.umich.edu/pap/snapshots/Niger/G_A_Niger1.html

And related essay with photos of the excavation and a number of its
finds, Elaine K. Gazda's "Karanis, an Egyptian Town in Roman Times:
Discoveries of the University of Michigan Expedition to Egypt
(1924-1935)":

http://www.umich.edu/~kelseydb/Exhibits/Karanis83/KaranisExcavation/KaranisExcavation.html

And a site with more images of artifacts from Karanis, "Karanis Online":

http://www.umich.edu/~kelseydb/OutKaranis.html

And, finally, images from an exhibition of textiles from Karanis, "The
Fabric of Everyday Life":

http://www.lsa.umich.edu/kelsey/galleries/Exhibits/textiles/classroom/

Valete, Quirites

G. Iulius Scaurus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 00:50:49 -0400

Ave,
On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 09:23:58PM -0700, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> Ave,
>
> As a citizen of Nova Roma, I make sure my taxes are paid. As Paterfamilias
> it is my duty to make certain that I organize a way to have as many
> Cornelians pay their taxes, if they are not able to pay for it themselves.
> I am not responsible for the actions of every other citizen of Nova Roma,
> and it is not my responsibilty to find a way to pay for their taxes either.
> It is up to them to pay for their taxes or to find other methods to make
> certain their taxes are paid.
>
> All magistrates and citizens have had over 90 days to submit their payment
> to Nova Roma. It is up to them to plan its payment (if it is a financial
> expense), or set up a method of getting those funds here.
>
> Besides, its not like this was the first year a tax has been implmented
> (that was last year).

I don't see how *any* of the above relates to the issue under
discussion; I'm sure that advertising your Gens and its policies,
disclaiming responsibility, stating the obvious, etc. has its place, but
the topic here was _privilege,_ and you have wandered all over the field
but have totally failed to address the point. I'll repeat it for
clarification: the magistrates received privileged treatment by having
the tax paid for them when they failed to pay it themselves. Do you have
anything pertinent to say under that heading?


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Graeca sunt, non leguntur.
It is Greek, you don't read that.
-- N/A

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Fri, 2 May 2003 22:07:12 -0700

----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi


Ave,
On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 09:23:58PM -0700, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
> Ave,
>
> As a citizen of Nova Roma, I make sure my taxes are paid. As Paterfamilias
> it is my duty to make certain that I organize a way to have as many
> Cornelians pay their taxes, if they are not able to pay for it themselves.
> I am not responsible for the actions of every other citizen of Nova Roma,
> and it is not my responsibilty to find a way to pay for their taxes either.
> It is up to them to pay for their taxes or to find other methods to make
> certain their taxes are paid.
>
> All magistrates and citizens have had over 90 days to submit their payment
> to Nova Roma. It is up to them to plan its payment (if it is a financial
> expense), or set up a method of getting those funds here.
>
> Besides, its not like this was the first year a tax has been implmented
> (that was last year).

I don't see how *any* of the above relates to the issue under
discussion; I'm sure that advertising your Gens and its policies,
disclaiming responsibility, stating the obvious, etc. has its place, but
the topic here was _privilege,_ and you have wandered all over the field
but have totally failed to address the point. I'll repeat it for
clarification: the magistrates received privileged treatment by having
the tax paid for them when they failed to pay it themselves. Do you have
anything pertinent to say under that heading?

Ave,

I have been all over the issue today, I guess you haven't noticed. Last year when the taxes were first implemented M. Octavius and I made certain that we contacted magistrates via email to remind them about tax payments. Most of them paid. A few of them were unable to for a varity of reasons and between him and I we had the issue resolved for them. If I recall correctly, a few of them were trying to make payment via paypal but kept running into situations where it kept trying to verify their CC. In the end, we ended up covering for them because of the difficulties. I do not consider it privileged treatment in so far that they have attempted numerous times to utilize paypal to make their payment and were unsuccessful due to a programming incompatability and considering it was the very first year NR had taxes implemented and in essence we were testing the system. I do not know if those same citizens have even paid this year or if they have encountered the same difficulties, only this years Consuls will know that. This year all citizens were aware hat taxes were coming, the Senate even expanded the tax collection time from 60 days to 90 days and the precedent was already established in regards to the methods of payment.

Oh, and just to let you know in case your wondering, I do not need to advertise the Gens Cornelia, I am not surprised that that is what you preceived. What I was doing was advertising a policy that we utilize in an effort to help citizens pay taxes. Maybe other Gentes will be able to start similar set up within their Gens. It is, IMHO, very beneficial.

Vale,

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 01:32:14 -0400

Ave,

On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 10:07:12PM -0700, L. Cornelius Sulla wrote:
>
> I have been all over the issue today, I guess you haven't noticed.

I've noticed. I simply happen to share a significant percentage of M.
Solaris' opinion with regard to the topic.

> Last year when the taxes were first implemented M. Octavius and I
> made certain that we contacted magistrates via email to remind them
> about tax payments. Most of them paid. A few of them were unable
> to for a varity of reasons and between him and I we had the issue
> resolved for them. If I recall correctly, a few of them were trying
> to make payment via paypal but kept running into situations where it
> kept trying to verify their CC. In the end, we ended up covering
> for them because of the difficulties.

Yes, you've said that before.

> I do not consider it
> privileged treatment in so far that they have attempted numerous
> times to utilize paypal to make their payment and were unsuccessful
> due to a programming incompatability and considering it was the very
> first year NR had taxes implemented and in essence we were testing
> the system.

Clearly, you do not understand the meaning of the word "privilege". It
is not related to whether they had problems, or were out of money, or
anything else of the sort; the meaning of the term is that they received
preferential treatment not available to the average citizen of NR. I
feel that this was wrong, for a number of reasons. However, this is not
a large issue for me; I've simply made a statement. You've been arguing
some point that isn't even related to that statement. If you want to
refute what I've said by explaining why the treatment shouldn't be
considered preferential, fine; otherwise, we're just talking past each
other for no reason.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maximae dilabuntur.
Through unity the small thing grows, through disunity the largest thing crumbles.
-- Sallust, "Jugurtha"

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Double posting
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 06:06:08 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, Quirites.

I have no bloody idea why a partial version of my post about taxes in
Roman Egypt was posted with the intended posting, but I apologise for it.

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 02:40:45 EDT

F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to Q. Cassius Calvus. Salve.

A very kind offer but I must decline. I haul my own freight. Vale.


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Digest Number 569 - Debt Humiliation
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 02:46:07 EDT

F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to Q. Cassius Calvus. Salve.

I am sitting in a back room smoking a cigar but not playing wink-wink,
nod-nod. Besides, according to Monty Python, it is:

"Wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say-no-more, say-no-more. A wink is as good as a nod
to a blind bat. Does your wife like photography, he says knowingly?
Photography, Candid Photos. Wink-wink, nudge-nudge"

Vale.


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Digest Number 569 - Debt Humiliation
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 02:51:26 EDT

F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to Q. Fabius Maximus aka The Big Green Bean.
Salve.

Of course, if you are with the government you can get away with anything.
It's part of the job description along with smoking cigars in the back room
with the beautiful people playing wink-wink, nod-nod. Of course, we have to
pay our taxes first even with the penalties so we have the perogative.
Wink-wink, nudge-nudge.
When my check is processed, I can change that to nod-nod but nudge-nudge is
so much more fun; especially if Diana is in the back room. Nothing like a
little nudge-nudge with the Sacerdoes of Venus. Know-what-I-mean,
say-no-more.

Vale.


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

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 06:56:42 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, omnes.

I think that there are quite a few different issues at play in this
disucssion.

First, of course, magistrates need to pay the tax on time as required
by law (although it is perfectly reasonable to treat the postmark of
the payment as establishing whether or not the deadline is met).

Second, Q. Cassius is perfectly within in his rights to point out when
that legal requirement is not met. Still, it strikes me as profoundly
unwise to make such an allegation without first checking with each
magistrate mentioned as to whether he had paid, since one runs the
serious risk of defaming someone who had acted in good faith, but
whose payment had been delayed by consequent actions of Paypal or
delay in entering the payment after it had been received. It should
be morally (and certainly is in many jurisdictions legally) incumbent
on the accuser to verify that an allegation of dereliction of duty --
which is what a magistrate not paying his tax is -- is true before
presenting it to the public. Furthermore, if I believe on good
evidence that a magistrate is violating the law, I would present an
actio to a praetor rather than simply announcing my belief to the
list; but that is my preference and I don't expect everyone to share
my preferences.

Third, I do not understand why anyone considers it a "privilege" that
the Consuls would harangue their cohortes and magisterial colleagues
to pay their taxes on time. It falls within the purview of the
seniormost officials of government to ensure that the government
presents a good example to all citizens, which such reminders to
officeholders are aimed at ensuring. I think of this as more a kick
in the arse for officeholders to make certain they fulfill their
obligations as officeholders than I do a privilege.

Fourth, I do not fully understand why it should be objectionable for
magistrates to pay taxes for members of their cohortes. There is
precious little reward for the many hours of work these people do for
Nova Roma and if a magistrate chooses to reward service with the
amount of the annual tax, I regard that as a Roman magnanimity to be
lauded. If a magistrate were recruiting people off the street to
apply for citizenship, paying for their ISP addresses, and paying
their taxes so that he could secretly vote for them in the comitia,
_that_ would be grossly objectionable, but no one in this discussion
has suggested that anything of the sort has ever happened. If friends
pay for the membership of other friends as a gift, or a gens pays for
a member who is down on his luck, why should it be objectionable for a
magistrate to do likewise for members of his cohort? And we have
taken a step in the wrong direction if simple kindness is a reason for
opprobrium.

The consuls are aware that there _may be_ a problem with the taxes of
some magistrates and I am certain they will investigate and resolve
the situation in accordance with the law. And if magistrates have
been unjustly accused, then that, too, is a matter for investigation.
Is that not enough?

Valete.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Much ado about nothing?
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 02:59:10 EDT

F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to M. Octavius Solaris. Salve.

"High-ranking magistrates?" I think I have been unintentionally
complimented. I am a lowly accensus ordinaire and scriba who writes a little
and does small services for a consul. You are correct that this whole thread
is much ado about nothing. We who serve, assidui or capite censi, do not
believe our love's labor is lost. In a twelfth night, this whole matter will
be resolved measure for measure. It is not as though we are a prince of Tyre
(although some may be tyre-d of the whole affair) and all is well that end's
well. Vale.


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Follow the Law (Was Debt Humiliation)
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 03:14:59 EDT

F. Galerius Aurelianus to G. Modius Athanasius et al. Salve.

O.K., citizens. This is getting ridiculous. Everybody is getting heated up
and this is not wise. If it would solve anything, I'd just resign my
official position and keep serving in my consular cohors as a private
citizen. Ya'll are taking this whole thing a little too seriously and are
beginning to remind me of Plautus' Braggart Soldier. Obeying the letter of
the law without any consideration of the normal (and sometimes unexpected)
circumstances of daily life worldwide is a bit futile for a volunteer
organization.
I made a payment at the beginning of April and during the time before I
looked into why I hadn't heard anything, I have been out of town teaching a
class on the Religio at a major pagan festival, been to a three day training
class for my day job, and am going through closing on a new home while
balancing my other two businesses. To paraphrase Prince Humperdink, "I'm
swamped. . . but I have my health." Now, NR is going to get my taxes with
the penalty but I really think that if the elected magistrates have got a
problem, they should work it out among themselves.
May the gods grant all here good fortune, good health, patience and
moderation.
Vale.


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 03:37:02 EDT

Cousin,

It always brightens my day to hear a good word from you. Everybody should
pay their taxes and rest assured, we all will or have done so. May Mercurius
and Minerva favor your endeavors. Respectfully and with affection,

Flavi Galeri


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Another Viewpoint on Taxes
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 03:40:44 EDT

Ah, a voice in the wilderness cries out, "Look yonder, neat educational
material near the Nile." Nice site it is too.

F Gal Aur Sec
Citizen, first and foremost


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] May TV programming
From:	Richard Winter <rwinter@nwlink.com>
Date:	Fri, 02 May 2003 22:09:44 -0700

:)
watched the program tonight


===========
Marcus Ritulius Hiberus
"Seminate aurum in Terram albam Foliatam..."




At 11:35 PM 5/2/03 +0000, you wrote:

>Salvete omnes,
>
>Here are some shows that you may be interested in:
>
>May 2 - History Channel - Caligula - Reign of Madness 9:00 pm
>
>May 12 - History Channel - Mail Call - The Pilum 8:00 pm
>
>May 15 - Discovery Channel - Vesuvius: Deadly Fury 10:00 pm
>May 16 - " " " " " 1:00 am
>May 17 - " " " " " 6:00 pm
>
>May 28 - Discovery Channel - Who Killed Julius Caesar? 8:00 pm
> " " " " " " " 11:00 pm
>
>May 31 - Discovery Channel - The Mummies of Rome 12:00 pm
> " " " Who Killed Julius Caesar? 1:00 pm
>
>Valete,
>
>Gaius Lanius Falco
>
>
>
>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/

----------


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.465 / Virus Database: 263 - Release Date: 3/25/03


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 03:43:30 EDT

F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to C. Minucius Scaevola. Salve.

Excuse please, but what he said may be pertinent to him by his reasoning.
Vale.


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Taxes
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 04:11:25 EDT

In a message dated 5/2/03 5:20:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jademermaid@aol.com writes:


> Maybe I'm just an overachiever, but it seems to me you get out what
> you put in to anything. If folks in higher positions cannot pay the
> tax, then they should lose their status, because that is the law/rule
> that was made. Maybe they can get re-elected next year and
> appreciate their position well enough to arrange to have their taxes
> taken care of before the deadline.
>
> Perhaps that seems harsh. If that is the case, then issue a grace
> period to the law that gives an extra week for those who simply must
> wait until the last minute. But that would have to go into effect
> next year. This deadline is up.
>
>

Once again, Romans, it takes an outsider to see more clearly than half the
elected magistrates! Thank you for your insight, prospective citizen, and I
on behalf of Roma
thank you for your generous contribution, when it was not even required.
I suspect you will be an important contributor to the Republic.
The rest of you who dissent, miss the point completely here. It may have
been badly worded as far as the intent, yet it is the law. Based on the
Edictum, it was the 30th, now if we indeed planned to include postmarked
dates, that's well and good. But than the current Edictum must be withdrawn
and the new one issued in its place with the correct wording.
As for certain people who are humiliated or refuse to pay because it is
voluntary, that is
their right under the law. They just cannot hold office. I ask you Romans,
shouldn't magistrates who serve the republic also contribute to its well
being? What sort of message are they sending if they do not? Think on that,
if you will.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus




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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 04:18:44 EDT

In a message dated 5/2/03 8:06:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ben@callahans.org
writes:


> I'm not particularly excited about the fact that NR officials get special
> treatment and privileges, such as L. Cornelius Sulla mentioned (the
> magistrates taxes being paid for them if they neglect to do so, etc

Nor I, but it kept the government together last year, thanks to the Consules'
foresight.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Digest Number 569 - Debt Humiliation
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 04:23:17 EDT

In a message dated 5/2/03 11:53:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com writes:


> F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to Q. Fabius Maximus aka The Big Green Bean.
>
> Salve.
>

That is the Great Green Bean to you, sir.

QFM


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

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Much ado about nothing?
From:	"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 01:21:34 +0200

Salve mi Sulla,

Sulla scripsit:

<< If you consider it [the topic] so distasteful why do you continue to post on it. You should focus on things that bring you more pleasure. >>

MOS: I don't consider it distasteful. I often find myself a little irritated by the way political debates are conducted here and I thought that adding my two cents could shed a new light on the whole topic.

<< Interesting that you are speculating on his [Q. Cassius'] state of mind at the time he published his initial post. Do you have the experience or education to make such a speculation? >>

MOS: This is a pointless remark. It was appearent from the tone of his postings.

<< I do not believe he said that. I think you ought to go back and read his initial post. He focused soley on the legalities. Per the Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi, if taxes are not received by the deadline (Ap. 30th) those members who are magistrates and apparitories who fail to pay their tax can no longer hold office. >>

MOS: He focused on the legalities for the sake of denouncing those who had not paid. Indeed this doesn't take away the problem he presented but that was not what my posting was about. I did not say that either Calvus or Faustus were right. I think both of them made valuable remarks and gave different perspectives on the situation.

<< Actually I understand [Faustus' emotional response], but my concern is with the implementation of the laws as promulgated by the People. As I have stated if we are a nation of laws we have to implement them and as I have questioned Lucius Arminius if he was so distressed and sad at this situation and he knew that his pater was having issues, why did he not volunteer to pay for his Pater's taxes. >>

MOS: Perhaps he was unable to. In any case that's more of a private than a public matter, I think.

<< I disagree [on the wrong use of the word "agenda"], Lucius Arminius is playing soley on emotion and ignoring the rule of law to get sympathy for his cause. Lucius Arminius has an agenda to not have his pater lose his position as governor. Just as I have an agenda to see that the laws of Nova Roma are carried out without any sign of favoritism in an open and above board fashion. >>

MOS: Once again, I am not saying that he was *right* in his protests. I'm just trying to give an alternative interpretation for his reaction rather than absolutely categorising his posting under the header of cold-blooded political machinations to get this and that. Not everyone reacts like this. Secondly, the system you have established in gens Cornelia can also be called favouritism. And third, there have been more than enough examples of favouritism (or the opposite) in the past of Nova Roma to make me suspicious of what you say.

<< Having empathy is fine, but we are not governed by our feelings. We are governed by the laws that have been passed by the People of Nova Roma. If we fail to implement the laws that we have passed then what use is there to call us a nation. We should just be a club. >>

MOS: Most "poltical" behaviour here reminds me more of clubs than it does of nations. Nova Roma often finds itself halfway down the path of club and nation. This is a difficult situation.

<< So, Solaris let me ask you. We have a law on the books, it has been passed by the People of Nova Roma. Should we implement this law or should we establish a precedent where magistrates are above the law? >>

MOS: That was not the question at all. Magistrates are not above the law. You obviously read much, much more into my posting than was the attempt. Life would be much easier if you weren't so supicious of other people on a political level.

<< Solarius, you fail to recognize last year. Last year M. Octavius Germancius and I were consuls and we monitored the tax payments and made sure that all of the Magistrates taxes wer paid before the deadline. Last year you did have hear of any issue of magistrates, senators or governors fail to pay their tax. Thats because we were on top of the situation and we contacted the governors to make sure that they were able to pay. If magistrates were not able to pay the tax we made sure their taxes were paid for them. So, the system functions if there is oversight by those who govern Nova Roma. >>

MOS: The 'system' was a general word. Not the tax system only. My name is Solaris, by the way :).

Optime vale!
M. Octavius Solaris




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

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Taxes
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 11:21:21 +0200

Salvete citizens,

I just want to say that I support Q Cassius Calvus email where he posted the
names of magistrates and appointed officials who have not paid their taxes.
But it is a shame that a few people were mentioned who have indeed paid
already :-p Basically, once someone holds a position in Nova Roma it
really does put him/her a bit under a microscope, the same as it does in
macronational politics. That's just the way it is and it is the 'risk' that
one takes when running for office or accepting one.

Honestly, I think his post was needed, even if he did sound a tiny bit
annoyed:-p. Certainly his post got *much* more attention than any previous
email which said 'this is a friendly reminder to pay your taxes". I'm sure
that as a result of his email, more than one or two people have now gone out
and paid their taxes.

Nova Roma needs money folks! Any citizen can walk in this forum, and ask a
question on any aspect of Roman culture and get 20 different answers from
citizens who are well-knowledged in these subjects. The least we can do is
scip a few cups of morning coffee during the last few months and pay the 6
to 12 USD in taxes.

Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina
Tribunus Plebis


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

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] File - List Guidelines, Main List
From:	Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date:	3 May 2003 09:19:22 -0000

Ex Officio Praetorium

EDICTVM PRAETORICIVM DE MODERATIONE

The praetores of Nova Roma hereby define the guidelines for
appropriate usage of Nova Roma's public communication forum, currently
located at:
Nova_Roma@yahoogroups.com

These guidelines are based on the guidelines previously issued by
our predecessors (Pompeia Cornelia and Patricia Cassia). As praetores
of Nova Roma, though, we keep the right to change these guidelines in
the future.

I. The Nova Roma forum (herein referred to as 'the list') is set up
so that replies will automatically be sent to the entire list. Please
keep this in mind when you are replying. You are not issuing a
private email. If your reply is intended for only one member, and has
no benefit to the rest of the list subscribers, consider sending it
privately.

II. Posts that merely voice agreement with a previous post without
expanding on an issue in any way are discouraged.

III. Please trim your posts. When replying to a thread, snip
unnecessary sections of the original post for brevity, and indicate
where you have done so by printing <snipped> at the appropriate space.
Correct usage of snipping prevents large posts that can quickly fill
subscribers mailboxes

IV. If you feel you must dispute or criticize another person's post,
consider doing so in private.
Sometimes a person makes a genuine mistake, and your gentle correction
via private email means much more to them than potentially
embarrassing them in the forum over what is an innocent error. We know
that during political debates, private exchanges are impractical.
Please use discretion in this area.

V. It is entirely appropriate to disagree publicly with another's
stated views or another's actions as they report such, or with the
actions of Nova Roma's Magistrates, Senate or otherwise appointed
officials.
Nova Roma is an organization of individuals from a wide variety of
nations, religions, cultural backgrounds and political viewpoints, and
it is only reasonable that our views should differ.

Please consider the following when expressing disagreement of opposing
viewpoints:

* Express respect for the person and the entitlement to his opinion,
and faith in his or her good intentions.

* Point out any themes in which you do not agree.

* If in the criticism of a person's actions, perhaps in the capacity
of a magistrate or senator, point out specifically which actions you
are referring to. Quote the message number of the post in
which you base your account and opinions. This makes things more
objective and often helpful to the person in question, as to what,
specifically, you are referring to, and your issues with same.

* In an academic debate, endeavor to offer references to back up your
assertions.

* At all times maintain politeness in the expression of your opinion
and endeavour to respect the rights and opinions of others.

Inappropriate behaviour includes:

the use of profane language; misrepresentation of the truth for the
purpose of making another person look foolish; calling others names;
criticizing a poster's personal character as opposed to criticizing his
ideas; making derrogatory, belittling, subjective statements about the
Gods and Goddesses of Rome (quoting from a myth does not apply) or
belittling deities of other religions for entertainment. Further, in
the interests of those under 18, sexual references must be strictly
within the context of an historical discussion. Otherwise, they are to
be made in private.

The arbitrary advertisment of goods and services (SPAM) is not
permitted on the Nova Roma mainlist, unless the advertiser is a member
of Nova Roma's marketplace, the Macellum. Macellum merchants are
welcome to advertise from time to time in a low-key fashion. This
entails a signature line/file, a one-time announcement of initial
affiliation with the Macellum, advertising in response to a post of
inquiry made in the forum, or an ad once every three months or so
advertising your presence in the Macellum.

VI. If you feel that a post is inappropriate in any way, consider
mailing the individual concerned privately, explaining your rationale
for grievance and asking for clarification"

If you would like to talk to us confidentially about a particular
post, please contact us at praetors@novaroma.org .

VII: During the time leading up to elections (held each November and
occasionally at other times if offices become vacant) this list is one
of the forums where candidates express their views and present their
qualifications to the populace. All of the strictures governing
appropriate behaviour mentioned hereto, shall remain in place and
apply to all candidates and their supporters.

VIII: Please do not give out personal information (i.e., address or
phone number) to the list. While it would be pleasant to believe we
are all good-hearted and sane, we are not; you cannot trust in that.

IX: Due to the influxes of SPAM and past incidents of posts from
those who wish nothing but to cause disruption and insult to the list,
or particular subscribers of the list, to wit, TROLLS, it has become
necessary to place all new list members on Moderated Status, just
until we are satisfied that such persons are indeed here to celebrate
aspects of Roma Antiquita and Nova Roma, as opposed to being here for
unjustifiable reasons. This is unfortunate, but it has proved
necessary.

X: Language Policies

The forum of Roma Antiquita was a large venue, with people of
different languages conversing, a few in this corner, a few in that
corner.
Rome was a very mulicultured place in her glory. Mind you official
information was in Latin, and in some cases Greek, but people were
free to speak informally as they wished in the language of their
choice.
Our constitution mandates freedom of communication provided it is not
dangerous or disruptive.

Currently, the praetores can understand Latin, Spanish, French,
Italian and Portuguese, so messages in those languages are most
welcome. For other languages, help can be obtained from the decuria of
interpreters of Nova Roma.

Thanks to the decuria of interpreters and to several magistrates or
legates who are willing to assist with list moderation, 'informal'
communication in the forum is open to most main languages. Feel free
to post in English, Latin, Italian, Portugese, Spanish, Fench, German,
Russian, Norwegian, Finnish, Swedish or any Slavik language. The
Praetors have many to thank for efforts in this regard.

***Exception: This does not contravene the Lex Cornelia de Linguis
Publicus
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/lege/index/html
which stipulates, though comitial mandate, that any offical government
legislation or priestly decrees must be issued in English or Latin
where applicable, so they can be translated verbatim into other
languages to be more easily understood by the entirety of the
populace.

XI. Topics of Discussion

The main focus of this list is Nova Roma and Roma Antiqua. However,
as members of a diverse international community we all have lives and
interests outside of Nova Roma. It is perfectly acceptable to discuss
non-Roman topics here, though keep in mind that not everyone may
share your interest in these topics.

XII: The Praetors have the imperium to govern the list, but prefer to
encourage positive interaction as opposed to punishing negative
behaviour. In the case of a poster whose actions violate these
guidelines aforementioned, the following escalated courses of
action shall be taken:

1.- A private memo from the Praetors' office or a Scribal designate,
stating the incident of infarction, and a reminder to review the
guidelines. Often people who are new to the list are not intentionally
trying to upset anybody.

2.- Another private memo as above.

3.- Moderated status (the poster may post but all posts
they issue are first reviewed by the Praetors or their designate).
The length of moderation shall be determined by the number of offences
in the past, the severity of the violation, and the intent to violate.
No citizen shall be kept in moderate status for more than 2 (two)
months
without a firm sentence issued by a legal court as described by the
Lex Salicia Iudiciaria:
http://www.novaroma.org/tabularium/leges/2002-11-24-iii.html

(For example: Nobody is going to be placed on moderated status for an
extended time for failure to trim posts or for saying 'me too')



Gnaeus Salix Astur,
Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus,
Praetores

Subject:	RE: [Nova-Roma] Much ado about nothing?
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 11:40:58 +0200

Salve Solaris,

MOS: And "care" is perhaps a vital word here... Those who do care for NR
seem to be fighting < among <each other.

I think fighting is a big word. Just because people disagree does *not* mean
that they are fighting or dislike eachother. In fact, I am disagreeing with
you right now, but that doesn't mean any more than that I disagree....

MOS:Some may note that I don't play "tax" either. Well I don't precisely
because of the reasons implicitly listed above.
MOS: I don't consider it distasteful. I often find myself a little irritated
by the way political debates are conducted here and I thought that adding my
two cents could shed a new light on the whole topic.

You certainly did shed new light with your (as usual) well written posts,
which are especially impressive since English is not your first language.
But your perspective is quite different than other citizens. In my opinion,
you don't pay your 6 USD in taxes because your heart is not in Nova Roma,
but with another group. That is understandable but I think this always gives
you a rather negative viewpoint on any discussion in Nova roma that you
disagree with.

Vale,
Diana Moravia Aventina

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] replies to: L. Seutoniusl, Renata, F. Galerius, L Arminius, & Violentilla (Jill)
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 11:55:06 +0200

Salvete citizens,

Sorry, but due to the time difference there are a few posts from me in a
row. So I've put a few short replies in one email. Sorry again!

To L. Suetonius;
<My deepest apologies. My response was ill-timed and born of a lifetime of
reading papal propaganda.
No apology was even slightly necessary! I just didn't want you to
misunderstand my original post.

To Renata:
I hope you re feeling better now! We've missed you!

To F. Galerius:
<When my check is processed, I can change that to nod-nod but nudge-nudge is
<so much more fun; especially if Diana is in the back room. Nothing like a
<little nudge-nudge with the Sacerdoes of Venus.
Naughty boy! <I like naughty> Be careful or you may get more than you
bargained for if we ever do end up sitting next to eachother in a back room
:-))))

To L. Arminius:
I can understand you being upset that names were mentioned in Q Cassius
Calvus' email, but don't get too upset dear! Those of us who hold an elected
or appointed position have to expect that we are in the spotlight now and
then and not always in a positive light!

To Jill:
<just a peasant, a peon. But one of the (hopefully future) people.
No one is a peasant or a peon here... And welcome to Nova Roma by the way.
It is nice to welcome another opininionated woman to our predominantly male
micronation! There are not many females here, but we have quality and not
quantity ;-) (ok, I admit it, I'm into the Girl Power thing :-p

Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Much ado about nothing?
From:	"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 02:45:14 +0200

Salve Diana!

<< I think fighting is a big word. Just because people disagree does *not* mean that they are fighting or dislike eachother. In fact, I am disagreeing with you right now, but that doesn't mean any more than that I disagree.... >>

MOS: Absolutely. There have been many discussions which had more bitterness and sharpness in them than the current one, but I still think that there could be done a lot to improve the ways discussions are conducted here. Or I may just be idealistic.

<< You certainly did shed new light with your (as usual) well written posts, which are especially impressive since English is not your first language. But your perspective is quite different than other citizens. In my opinion, you don't pay your 6 USD in taxes because your heart is not in Nova Roma, but with another group. That is understandable but I think this always gives you a rather negative viewpoint on any discussion in Nova roma that you disagree with. >>

MOS: Thanks for the compliments. It is true that I have this additional reason for not paying money here. I have a host of other reasons as well but if I go into this I don't think it will be very constructive. About your last comment, I'm not so sure. As I've observed pointless debates here have become less frequent and more civil and there is more room for general discussion than there used to be, which is a good thing. Sometimes I have to sit on my hands not to make comments but I usually shut up because I *know* that my chief interest is not here... As such, I wouldn't contribute much to any discussion without being confronted with the logical argument that I actually have divided interests :).

Cura ut valeas!
M. Octavius Solaris


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

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] A bit more about taxes
From:	"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 11:41:59 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, Quirites.

For those who worry about the state of their tax records, here's an
example of the same sort of problem in Roman Egypt, a receipt for
payment of taxes by Hermas, son of Iosephios, issued by [someone] and
written for him by Sourous, son of Abrahamios, P.Duk.inv. 465:

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/records/465.html

It has a nice image at three sizes of P.Duk.inv. 465.

Valete, Quirites.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Question for Long-Time Members
From:	"William Rogers" <wlr107@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 12:56:25 -0000

Would you please add me? I would LOVE to read and learn! :-)

P. Tarquitius Rufus


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Cornelius Sulla"
<alexious@e...> wrote:
> Ave,
>
> Its novaromalaws@yahoogroups.com
>
> I own the list. If you would like me to add you please let me know.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: politicog
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 1:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Question for Long-Time Members
>
>
>
> --- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
> wrote:
>
> > We have established separate lists dedicated to
> > specific areas of Roman Study (Laws, Religio, Arts,
> > Military, etc etc);
> > We have established the Senate and the Comitia's
> > and in addition to that we have established working
> > procedures for all three Comitias and the Senate
> > itself;
> > All laws and regulations are accessible to the
> > People at any time and updates usually do not take
> > more than a few days to be posted;
> >
> >
> > These are just some of the improvements that have
> > been done, that I can think of at 11 pm (in
> > California).
> >
> > I hope this answers some of your questions.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> > Active citizen from day 1
> >
> >
> >
>
> As one of the newer citizens, I appreciated Lucius
> Cornelius Sulla Felix's rundown of Nova Roman
> historian (since as a macronational I have had
> undergraduate studies in history).
> Just a question for anyone who knows: where can I
> find the list that deals with Roman Law? I don't
> remember seeing anything about that on the website.
> Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Lucius Quintius Constantius of Lacus Magni
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.com
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> 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] Much ado about nothing?
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 09:00:34 -0400

Salve

Do not forget Cousin that you are from a NOBLE family and that makes you
HIGH-RANKING.

Vale


Your Cousin

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus




----- Original Message -----
From: <PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 2:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Much ado about nothing?


> F. Galerius Aurelianus Secundus to M. Octavius Solaris. Salve.
>
> "High-ranking magistrates?" I think I have been unintentionally
> complimented. I am a lowly accensus ordinaire and scriba who writes a
little
> and does small services for a consul. You are correct that this whole
thread
> is much ado about nothing. We who serve, assidui or capite censi, do not
> believe our love's labor is lost. In a twelfth night, this whole matter
will
> be resolved measure for measure. It is not as though we are a prince of
Tyre
> (although some may be tyre-d of the whole affair) and all is well that
end's
> well. Vale.
>
>
> [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] Follow the Law (Was Debt Humiliation)
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 09:04:13 -0400

Salve ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!

YOU MADE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO PAY THE TAX.

When the tax collectors fix the problem and post your payment. Then this
will all me moot.

Stay just were you are, in office and working for the good of the republic.

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Citizen and Taxpayer


----- Original Message -----
From: <PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Follow the Law (Was Debt Humiliation)


> F. Galerius Aurelianus to G. Modius Athanasius et al. Salve.
>
> O.K., citizens. This is getting ridiculous. Everybody is getting heated
up
> and this is not wise. If it would solve anything, I'd just resign my
> official position and keep serving in my consular cohors as a private
> citizen. Ya'll are taking this whole thing a little too seriously and are
> beginning to remind me of Plautus' Braggart Soldier. Obeying the letter
of
> the law without any consideration of the normal (and sometimes unexpected)
> circumstances of daily life worldwide is a bit futile for a volunteer
> organization.
> I made a payment at the beginning of April and during the time before I
> looked into why I hadn't heard anything, I have been out of town teaching
a
> class on the Religio at a major pagan festival, been to a three day
training
> class for my day job, and am going through closing on a new home while
> balancing my other two businesses. To paraphrase Prince Humperdink, "I'm
> swamped. . . but I have my health." Now, NR is going to get my taxes with
> the penalty but I really think that if the elected magistrates have got a
> problem, they should work it out among themselves.
> May the gods grant all here good fortune, good health, patience and
> moderation.
> Vale.
>
>
> [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: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	"William Rogers" <wlr107@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 13:05:33 -0000

Ladies and Gentlemen,


First of all, I am NOT posting this as a Quaestor, just to be clear.

I believe it is high time we open the tax rolls for public view, and
if necessary, post those results on a specific site on the Nova Roma
Main page. Who is the SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL (Name here folks, and their
position please) who oversees this incoming tax revenues? Maybe what
needs to be done is a quaterly posting of the N.R. Account(s) by the
assigned Quaestors. Just an idea.

Moving on....

We also need to open an honest, NON-ATTACKING discussion on
completing a Census, and start BEFORE Jusy 1st on this count. You go
the the page that lists families, ad we are STILL carrying gens that
have been closed over a year! WHY?! We need to reform how the Gens
page is set up anyway...it hurts those on the bottom of the page, as
the page takes forever. I would like to recommend we set up sub-pages
in alphabetical order for the gens listing as a possibility.

On to the next topic: Leadership accountability and standards. Your
leaders SHOULD be held to a higher standard! They must adhere to the
laws, and those laws MUST be enforced with EQUALITY and EVEN-
HANDEDNESS for ALL citizens, or we are just wasting our time here. I
HATE IT WHEN SOMEONE WASTES MY TIME!

How about we move away from individual attacks, and try to figure how
to fix the base problem? Use our combined intelligenct to find
SOLUTIONS!

Publius Tarquitius Rufus

Subject:	RE: [Nova-Roma] Re: Digest Number 569 - Debt Humiliation
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 15:35:05 +0200

Salve Calvus,

Sorry, but I have to disagree with your reasoning below:

< Nova Roman law is conveniently ignored when a person is popular and or
powerful. How
<quickly people forget that the proper Pater of Gens Moravia was
<summarily ousted illegally. He was removed without trial, he was
<removed without failure to respond to a Census (another law
<conveniently ignored because 1700+ citizens looks better than a
<couple hundred). He was just removed because Diana (sorry Diana as
<much as I like you personally) is popular.

When I returned in April 2002 only a handful of people remembered me from
1999 & 2000 and Lucius Moravius was totally inactive. So I really think that
popularity had nothing to do with this issue since when I was made
Materfamilias thereby ousting L Moravius, no one in Nova Roma knew either
one of us.

But you are right: Lucius Moravius did not have a trial and had no chance to
answer a Census, but do you really think he was ousted illegally? After not
reponding to my numerous emails asking to be reinstated into Gens Moravia,
he then failed to respond within 45 days to (then) Praetor Titus Labienus
Fortunatus who then acted in his place according to the EDICTUM PRAETORICIUM
of August 7 2755 :Praetores May Act on Behalf of Absent Patresfamilias.I
could be wrong, but I believe the logic was that since my original
citizenship was from Sept 1999 and L Moravius from Dec 17 2000, removing him
as Paterfamilias and making me Materfamilias was correcting an error.

<I have no doubt for one minute that if I had failed to pay my taxes to Nova
Roma I'd
<been removed from Rogator one second after the stroke of midnight.
<Why? Because I'm not one of the "beautiful people" of Nova Roma.

Hey now angel... What's this all about? You're not one of the "beautiful'
people" ???? Says who? I can send you a long list of citizens who have you
on their 'beautiful people' list ;-)

Vale,
Diana Moravia

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Lex Vedia Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 09:56:15 -0400

On Sat, May 03, 2003 at 04:18:44AM -0400, qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/2/03 8:06:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ben@callahans.org
> writes:
>
> > I'm not particularly excited about the fact that NR officials get special
> > treatment and privileges, such as L. Cornelius Sulla mentioned (the
> > magistrates taxes being paid for them if they neglect to do so, etc
>
> Nor I, but it kept the government together last year, thanks to the Consules'
> foresight.

If the members of that government do not care enough for it to send in
a pittance that, according to the law, is a *requirement* for
maintaining their office, I would far rather see that version of the
government fall apart and a new one - with people who _do_ care enough -
form in their place. The term "malfeasance" exists to describe just this
kind of thing.

This is not to say that I don't favor a little slack being cut in
emergencies. However, the key word here is "emergencies", not
"privilege for the in-crowd."


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:	[Nova-Roma] Gens Moravia / taxes
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 14:52:09 -0000

Salvete omnes,

In my opinion what happened in gens Moravia was fair,just and about
time. I've been howling about inactive, uninterested and dead beat
gens heads for the last 10 months. I understood that the problem
would eventually be taken care of which it had in this case though I
do see others still left on the rosters.

The tax discussion has been just great. It really livened up the slow
pace of the list over the last week. Think positive!

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Ludi Florales Circensis, first semifinal race results!
From:	Bill Gawne <gawne@cesmail.net>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 11:15:37 -0400

And now! It's time for the first semifinal race in the
Ludi Florales Circenses!

It's a beautiful day at the racetrack, and the representatives
of the racing factions are out in force! All of the beautiful
people are here to support their favorite drivers.

We have four races today! The winner of each will advance to
tomorrow's Ludi Florales championship race.

In our first race of the day, Praesina's chariot Essedum is
driven by Italicus, sponsored by Manius Constantinus Serapio.
Essedum is the defending Ludi Florales champion, hoping to repeat.
Praesina also fields the chariot Delecta Mea, owned by the
beautiful and talented Julilla Sempronia Magna and driven
by Crescens. Russata answers with Terrifica, driven by
Fabius Brasilicus and owned by Titus Arminius Genialis,
while Albata is represented by Imperator Invictus, driven
by Draco Borealis and owned by Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa.

They're at the starting line... the drivers exchanging
pleasantries... and now they're off!

Thundering down the length of the track, neck and neck...
Now we can see the red chariot moving toward the inside lane
as Brasilicus whips his horses ahead! And there they go,
into the first turn! The red chariot hugging the spina,
with the other three close behind. The white Draco Borealis
is second, with the two Praesina chariots following fast.
Down the backstretch of the first lap they're strung out in
line now, keeping close and rating their horses... still
red, white, green, and green... Now into the second turn...
and out they come, as the ball drops marking the end of the
first lap!

They're really racing here folks! These chariots are bunched
in close. Now they approach the far turn again, and again
the red chariot is practically on the wall, he's so close!
The other drivers are letting him set the pace... and what a
pace it is! Can these horses possibly last? Inquiring minds
want to know!

Here they come around the near turn again... still red, white,
green and green... as the second lap ends!

It looks like Draco Borealis is going to make a move now! The
white chariot is moving up on the outside, overtaking the red!
Yes! Draco Borealis has taken the lead! Now he closes on the
inside track as they round the far turn...

On the back side, we see it's now white, red and the two greens
as they thunder down the backstretch. Essedum and Delecta Mea
seem happy to stay back there... for now. Now they're around
the near turn, and the red chariot is practically running the
white into the spina! But they're clear now, and the four
thunder past the starting line to end the third lap.

And now the white driver has clearly had enough of the pressure
from red! His whip is flying, lashing out toward his nemisis face!
Now the russata chariot is backing off... as they round the far
turn again.

Down the backstretch it's white, red, green, and green... now
red closes on the white chariot again, pressing him toward the
wall! Now they're into the turn and Oh No! The white chariot
has lost its inside wheel! I guess he scraped the wall one
too many times! Terrifica shoots around, taking the lead again
and ... oh, what a bad break for the green team! The Delecta
Mea chariot has tangled up with the crippled white chariot now,
but the defending champion Essedum swings clear of the hazard
and closes on russata's Terrifica as the fifth lap is underway!

Now Italicus, the veteran praesina driver, is letting his horses
have their heads. They're closing fast on the leading russata
chariot as the two round the far turn... Coming down the
backstretch Italicus shakes his reins out again, his horses
surging forward, closing the gap with every stride....
It looks like the praesina horses have plenty of stamina
for this last lap and a half of racing!

Around the near turn, and now they're into the final lap!

Essedum surges ahead! Italicus is pushing his horses for
all they've got now, letting it all hang out here in the
last lap! Brasilicus, the russata driver, is whipping his
horses repeatedly, trying to prevent Italicus from overtaking...
Italicus lets the red chariot have the wall for the far turn...

And DOWN THE STRETCH THEY COME! Italicus on the outside, his
reins loose around his waist as he fends off repeated blows
from Brasilicus. Now the green chariot has taken the lead!
With every stride the gap opens as Italicus, sensing victory,
swings into the final turn. Brasilicus desperately follows,
but Italicus can not be caught. And that's it! The race is
over! Praesina wins!


RESULTS:

1st Essedum
2nd Terrifica
3rd Draco Borealis (accident)
4th Delecta Mea (accident)

Classified: Essedum

Essedum will advance to the Final round. Congratulations to
the Praesina team, to Italicus, and to Manius Constantinus
Serapio, the owner, for a great race!

Now, a brief intermission before our second race of the day.

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Tributum
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 08:13:50 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete Quirites,

The Tributum (Taxes) seems to have generated a lot of
posts. If we had a 1 cent tax per word on posts about
taxes we might have generated more income than we did
from the taxes. ;)

I'll add my few cents worth to the discussion.

This isn't the first year that we have collected the
Tributum. The problems that citizens from outside the
United States might have sending funds to Nova Roma
has come up many times on this list. Surprise at
problems with sending the Tributum isn't a very good
excuse. The Tax collection period is two months long,
and that should have been ample time for citizens who
had reasons from past experance or from the posts
about problems to anticipate the need to act earlier
than the last minute.

Some are claiming they sent the Tributum earlier, and
they weren't credited. Nova Roma sends out an
automatically-generated email when the Tributum is
paid, and that email is your receipt. Maybe some
citizens are more trusting than I am, but I'm in the
habit of expecting a receipt when I tender funds, and
if one isn't recived, I find out why.

The Lex regarding office holders who failed to pay the
Tributum has to be applied. There is no getting around
that matter. I Have no problem with allowing a
reasonable time for snail mail postmarked by the
deadline to arrive, say a week, but once that time
period has elapsed magistrates who have failed to live
up to thier legal obligations have to be removed from
office.

Public "Humiliation" is a very Roman means of
correcting a problem such as a failure to pay the
Tributum. Public opinion was very outspoken in
Antiquita about citizens who failed to meet the mores
of the community. Public preasure would be unrelentant
until the citizen corrected his actions. In a
situation like this a citizen might be followed by
people telling any and every one that he failed to pay
the Tributum, and even have people hired to stand
outside his home and sing insulting songs all night. A
Post pointing out a failure to pay the Tributum is
quite mild by the standards of our ancestors.


=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

Roman Citizen

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Question for Long-Time Members
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@earthlink.net>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 08:26:52 -0700

Ave!

Sure I will add you immediately.

Vale,

Sulla
----- Original Message -----
From: William Rogers
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 5:56 AM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: Question for Long-Time Members



Would you please add me? I would LOVE to read and learn! :-)

P. Tarquitius Rufus


--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Cornelius Sulla"
<alexious@e...> wrote:
> Ave,
>
> Its novaromalaws@yahoogroups.com
>
> I own the list. If you would like me to add you please let me know.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: politicog
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 1:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Question for Long-Time Members
>
>
>
> --- "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
> wrote:
>
> > We have established separate lists dedicated to
> > specific areas of Roman Study (Laws, Religio, Arts,
> > Military, etc etc);
> > We have established the Senate and the Comitia's
> > and in addition to that we have established working
> > procedures for all three Comitias and the Senate
> > itself;
> > All laws and regulations are accessible to the
> > People at any time and updates usually do not take
> > more than a few days to be posted;
> >
> >
> > These are just some of the improvements that have
> > been done, that I can think of at 11 pm (in
> > California).
> >
> > I hope this answers some of your questions.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
> > Active citizen from day 1
> >
> >
> >
>
> As one of the newer citizens, I appreciated Lucius
> Cornelius Sulla Felix's rundown of Nova Roman
> historian (since as a macronational I have had
> undergraduate studies in history).
> Just a question for anyone who knows: where can I
> find the list that deals with Roman Law? I don't
> remember seeing anything about that on the website.
> Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Lucius Quintius Constantius of Lacus Magni
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.com
>

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Thanks!
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 15:38:02 -0000

Salvete omnes,

I sent in my tax payment by special delivery snail mail this season
because of a glitch with paypal. I found it worked best to keep in
touch with the NR Tax department who I made aware of my coming
payment and kept their eye out for it. The payment went through just
fine.

I just want to send a special thanks to Titus Fortunatus Labienus and
Gnaeus Octavius Noricus for their attention and help on this matter.

Respectfully,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti Censi
From:	politicog <politicog@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 08:25:36 -0700 (PDT)

> Sulla scripsit:
>
> >
> << I do not believe he said that. I think you ought
> to go back and read his initial post. He focused
> soley on the legalities. Per the Lex Vedia Assidui
> et Capiti Censi, if taxes are not received by the
> deadline (Ap. 30th) those members who are
> magistrates and apparitories who fail to pay their
> tax can no longer hold office. >>
>
> [Marcus Octavius Solaris]: He focused on the
legalities for the sake of
> denouncing those who had not paid. Indeed this
> doesn't take away the problem he presented but that
> was not what my posting was about. I did not say
> that either Calvus or Faustus were right. I think
> both of them made valuable remarks and gave
> different perspectives on the situation.
>


As I understand (and I'm a new citizen so please
bear with if my understandings are incorrect) to
understand the Lex Vedia de Assidui there are at least
six separate documents to take in consideration: 1.
the Constitution (which proscribes the order of
precedence of leges, senatus consultum, and
magisterial edicta); 2. the Lex Vedia de Assidui et
Capiti Censi itself, 3. the Lex Cornelia Octavia de
Assidui et Capiti Censi; 4. the Lex Vedia Tributorm;
5. the Senatus Consulta on Taxation and amendments
thereof; and 6. the edict of the Consul Titus Labienus
Fortunatus on Taxation.

I have put the documents in this order because that
is my understanding of their precedence. Indeed, in
reading over the Lex Cornelia Octavia it becomes clear
that by passage of that lex, the People have
overturned the portions of the Senatus Consulta that
had previously provided that cives who were enrolled
between December and Februrary would have their taxes
waived for their first year.

Sulla says above that the Lex Vedia provides that if
the taxes of the magistrates and apparitores are not
paid by the deadline, then they can no longer hold
office. In reading carefully, the Lex Vedia it does
not say that. Yes, it does say that members of the
capiti censi are unable to run for or hold office as
one of the magistrates, ordinarii (including
apparitores) or as provincial governor. There is no
mention in the Lex Vedia de Assidui and Capiti Censi
of that occuring on the date of the tax deadline.
Rather, under the first sentence of number II of the
Lex, which states: "Citizens who pay taxes in such
amount and in such manner as may be defined by the
Senate shall be considered assidui." So the matter of
deadlines and other manners of implementation of the
Lex rest with the Senate. The Lex Vedia de Assidui
and Capiti Censi in my opinion cannot be read as
establishing any deadline for the tax, or indeed for
that matter of making it annual. They could just as
well have decided on a tax of $1.00 a month, or $5.00
a week. There is no provision in the law that says it
must be an annual tax.
In reading the original of the Senatus Consulta on
Taxation, it has the following provisions: "III. Taxes
are due, paid in full, no later than the last day of
February of the year." "D. The Senate may, at its
discretion, issue a Senatus Consultum extending the
deadline for paying taxes on a provincia-by-provincia
basis, in case of natural disaster, military conflict,
or other extraordinary mitigating circumstance. Such
deadlines may not be extended past the last day of
August." Also, it should be noted that in the consuls
edict, it is provided as follows: "The tax deadline is
the last day of Aprilis. Taxes may be remitted after
that date, with a penalty of an extra 50%. Exempli
gratia, a civis who owes $12 would need to pay $18
after the deadline." The only vote I could find in
the Senate amending the Lex Vedia de Assidui et Capiti
Censi was one that granted the Consul authority to set
the tax rates and permitting the local governors to
receive the taxes. However, I find no authority in the
Senatus Consulta for the Consul to establish the end
of April as the deadline, as the Senatus Consulta says
that the deadline is the last day of February, and may
only be extended to no later than the end of August on
a provincial basis, and only in cases of natural
disaster, military conflict, or other mitigating
circumstance, and the extension is only allowed by
Senatus Consultum, not magisterial edict. Admittedly
on two of the links for the Senate Voting Results (27
Dec 2755 and 31 Jan 2756) I am unable to access,
because I receive a URL not found error, so it is
possible that the Lex Vedia de Assidui and Capiti
Censi may have been further amended at one of those
sessions, of which I am not aware.
I think it should also be noted that the change of
status is not official until the censors have made it
so. It is my understanding that the censors publish
the annual list no later than the end of November. I
believe the magisterial elections take place in
December, which seems to me to be a flaw in the
legislation. Since it would be difficult to determine
who exactly who is assidui and who is capiti censi
among the candidates in such a short period of time.
Perhaps the censors should produce the list at an
earlier time in the year, which would be sufficient
lead time for candidates to know if they are
delinquent.
While I am on this subject it may be helpful if one
of the magistrates could publish a complete text of
the Senatus Consulta on taxation as it currently
stands, including the amendments that have been
adopted.
As you will see in my profile in the album
gentium, that my status is listed as unknown. I will
save you the trouble of guessing and say that I am
capiti censi under the provisions of the Lex Cornelia
de Assidui et Capiti Censi (since that is automatic
for new citizens). I do intend to pay the tax and the
surcharge, but there are some people who owe me money
that have paid as yet, and I am unable to pay the tax
until that happens. Today I had to scrouge for loose
change in my couch just to have enough cash to make
the bus to work.


Lucius Quintius Constantius of Lacus Magni





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Ludi Florales Trivia Contest - day 4
From:	Gnaeus Equitius Marinus <gawne@cesmail.net>
Date:	Sat, 3 May 2003 18:27:44 -0400

Same rules as previous days. All answers must be e-mailed
to gawne@cesmail.net. Anyone posting answers to the Nova-Roma
list will be immediately disqualified and any answers sent
after the answers are posted will also have to be disqualified.

Enjoy!


1. What was the purpose of the Lex Plotia Agraria?

2. What did Romans do in the "triclinium"?

3. What does Fortuna Favet Fortibus mean?

4. In B.H. Liddell Hart's book Scipio Africanus the subtitle said he
was greater than who?

5. Who had a Villa build at Tivoli between 118CE and 134CE?

-- Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Digest Number 569 - Debt Humiliation
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 23:22:35 -0000

Salve Diana,

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Diana Moravia Aventina"
<diana@p...> wrote:
> When I returned in April 2002 only a handful of people remembered
me from
> 1999 & 2000 and Lucius Moravius was totally inactive. So I really
think that
> popularity had nothing to do with this issue since when I was made
> Materfamilias thereby ousting L Moravius, no one in Nova Roma knew
either
> one of us.
>
> But you are right: Lucius Moravius did not have a trial and had no
chance to
> answer a Census, but do you really think he was ousted illegally?

Yes, I do.

>After not
> reponding to my numerous emails asking to be reinstated into Gens
Moravia,
> he then failed to respond within 45 days to (then) Praetor Titus
Labienus
> Fortunatus who then acted in his place according to the EDICTUM
PRAETORICIUM
> of August 7 2755 :Praetores May Act on Behalf of Absent
Patresfamilias.

Yes he may act on behalf, such as to get you readmitted to Gens
Moravia. No where in the Edict does specifically it give the Praetor
the authority to oust the absent Pater/Materfamilias, merely act in
his or her absence. Why not then apply the Edict so Julilla
Sempronia Magna (sorry Julilla Sempronia Magna, not dragging you into
this just remembered a ML conversation we had back in the Nov-Dec
time frame about being stuck in a closed Gens with an absent Pater)
isn't languishing in a closed Gens with an absent Pater?

>I
> could be wrong, but I believe the logic was that since my original
> citizenship was from Sept 1999 and L Moravius from Dec 17 2000
>removing him
> as Paterfamilias and making me Materfamilias was correcting an
error.

According to the Album Civium your current citizenship dates from 6-
25-2002. Now the real question is did you formally renounce your
original citizenship that dates back to Sept 1999? If the answer is
yes then the logic that was applied (if indeed that is the case) is
completely illogical. If the answer is no then you should have never
been removed from Gens Moravia in the first place.

> Hey now angel... What's this all about? You're not one of
the "beautiful'
> people" ???? Says who? I can send you a long list of citizens who
have you
> on their 'beautiful people' list ;-)

I'm sure I can send you a longer list of people who have me on a list
that begins with the letter "s." (at least the English translation).

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Gens Moravia / taxes
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Sat, 03 May 2003 23:33:35 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Quintus Lanius Paulinus"
<mjk@d...> wrote:
> Salvete omnes,
>
> In my opinion what happened in gens Moravia was fair,just and about
> time. I've been howling about inactive, uninterested and dead beat
> gens heads for the last 10 months. I understood that the problem
> would eventually be taken care of which it had in this case though

Salve,

If there were a Lex passed that stated that if a Pater/Mater failed
to respond to a petition/request from the Censors after a reasonable
period of time that the Pater/Mater could be removed from that
position, hey not a problem! However, no such Lex exists. What
happened was really "rule by magistarial fiat."

Of course if there was some actual real gens reform to put the gens
in line with its historical nature it would all be a moot point.
After all in historical times (well except for the real early years
where a "gens" consisted of only a husband/wife and children) there
was no Paterfamilias of a gens. A paterfamilias was only the head of
his own household and wasn't even really considered as such while his
own pater was still on the mortal coil. Since women were considered
somewhere between the cattle and the slaves, materfamilias is
completely ahistorical but one must concede something to the times.
<G>


Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus