| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org> |
| Date: |
Sun, 18 May 2003 20:45:32 -0400 |
|
On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 07:10:07PM -0400, AthanasiosofSpfd@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/18/2003 5:24:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> ben@callahans.org writes:
>
> > No; you can't have a debate with me because you flail uselessly, change
> > issues constantly, and distort facts. As long as you keep doing these
> > things, it's not a debate -- it's a pissing match. The main issue that I
> > responded to in Diana's post was answered simply by her after a calm
> > discussion, and I was more than satisfied with the results of it.
> > Most of what came after that was just useless noise that produced no
> > positive effect whatsoever.
>
> Caius Minucius Scaevola:
>
> I am not so sure they are failing uselessly.
<smile> We have a slight problem here: I don't know whether you've
misread/musunderstood the word that I used ("flailing" rather than
"failing"), or whether you have understood and simply misspelled it. No
great matter, but I do wonder.
> I have silently, and patiently,
> watched this debate. To be honest, I have seen the criticism proposed by
> Sulla, and I can see his point.
I have also noted the point of some of Sulla's criticisms - a number of
them were, in my opinion, capably answered by Cordus. For me, most of
Sulla's points are drowned by his rhetoric, insults, and attacks; if
those were absent, I would gladly try to answer the criticisms to the
extent that I can - but as things stand, that's not what happens.
> For the record I like the Senior Consul. I do not belong to any faction that
> serves to officially oppose him. I do think his extremely large group of
> advisors is too much, but its his choice to make. It does, however, send up
> a few red flags -- in my opinion -- when nothing has been presented to the
> populace. He has also been pretty silent on the main list.
Strange as it may seem, I can't come up with a metric of any sort for
how often a Consul should post on the main list. Please don't take this
as an argument - I simply can't estimate what a reasonable level would
be in this case.
> So what I would propose. . . .Instead of spending all the time and effort
> responding to criticism, work on those projects that should be presented to
> the whole citizenry. I would image I can speak for several -- who feel as I
> do -- that the back and forth e-mails is getting out of hand. We would like
> to SEE something.
I understand that; the point has been made by enough people, including
those whose judgement I respect, that it is very clear. Can you
understand that this decision does not lie in my hands, or the hands of
anyone else in the Cohors?
> Additionally, I do not understand "not at liberty to
> say..." A simple checklist of..."we are working on this, this, and this. We
> are almost done with A, and project B is about half done."
I believe that Cordus has just addressed that issue; I don't really have
anything to add to it.
> In closing I would caution you Caius Minucius Scaevola. Please do not take
> the same defensive, and attacking posture with me as you do with Sulla --
> what I mention here today, I would gladly bring up whether the Senior Consul
> is present or not.
If you look at my posts carefully - and I would appreciate you granting
me that courtesy - you will see that I do not attack first except where
I'd been previously attacked by my opponent (and I am usually willing to
respond in kind if my opponent's tone changes; I can cite examples, if
you wish.) I believe that it is a military truism that an attacker must
vanquish while a defender must only survive, and I prefer the stronger
position. I will also ask you to note that I have had nothing to gain in
these debates: I have simply attempted to defend a group of people
unjustly judged and in some cases attacked - at some cost to myself.
> I voted for the Senior Consul, and I have a right to say
> what I have to say. Let us see some action.
You certainly do have a right to say it, and I support that right. You
have stated your viewpoint without insulting or attacking anyone - and
you got back a reasoned reply in return. If I do have a /modus
operandi/, it is exactly this; I trade respect for respect, gentle
speech for gentle speech, and insult for insult. In all cases, I strive
to have my reply of a better grade than the original post - figuring out
where that leads in all three cases should not be a difficult matter.
My compliments to you, by the way (and Diana, whom I had forgotten to
mention under this heading) on posting into what you both perceived as
an automatically hostile environment.
Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dictum, factum.
Said and done.
-- Terence, "Heautontimorumenos"
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] A Roman Barge on the Rhine |
| From: |
"Gregory Rose" <gfr@intcon.net> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 02:02:06 -0000 |
|
G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.
Avete, Quirites.
Here's a Dutch site on the excavation of a Roman barge, "Ontdekking
van een Romeins schip in die Leidsche Rijn" (Discovery of a Roman ship
in Leidsche Rijn):
http://archeologie.kennisnet.nl/schip/
The site reports on the Netherlands Institute for Maritime
Archaeology's excavation of an extraordinarily well-reserved Roman
barge near the city of Utrecht (in a housing project called Leidsche
Rijn). It has a weekly journal of the excavations, two webcams aimed
at the barge itself, and a gallery of photographs from the dig. The
site takes a while to load, but is well worth the wait. The site is
in Dutch with an English summary (Free Translation --
http://www.freetranslation.com/ -- has a Dutch-English machine
translation facility, but like most such things it is a hit-and-miss
affair).
Valete, Quirites.
G. Iulius Scaurus
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com> |
| Date: |
Sun, 18 May 2003 23:24:50 -0400 |
|
Salve
I have a question. I know that the Senior Consul holds the Fasces for May,
but does he have to? If he is going to be absent can't he and the junior
Consul swap months. In the Ancient Republic didn't one Consul remain in Rome
to govern while the other attended to the military campaign of the moment? I
know that both were equally in command on different days but both left only
when Rome was fighting on two fronts.
We have a system of twin executives can this not meet the needs of a absents
of one?
Vale
Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Citizen
----- Original Message -----
From: "A. Apollonius Cordus" <cordus@strategikon.org>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2003 7:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors
> A. Apollonius Cordus to C. Modius Athanasius and all
> citizens and peregrines, greetings.
>
> I hope neither you nor Minucius Scaevola mind me
> intercepting a small piece of your message to him to
> add my own comments.
>
> > Additionally, I do not understand "not at liberty to
>
> > say..." A simple checklist of..."we are working on
> > this, this, and this. We are almost done with A,
> > and project B is about half done."
>
> This is a reasonable request. The problem is that the
> Consul is away, though I believe he is returning in
> the next day or two. Before he left he gave us no
> instructions to announce publicly what we are or have
> been working on, and it would not be appropriate for
> us to announce this without his permission. He has
> given us permission to say that we have been working
> on electoral reform, so we have said so.
>
> I can think of no reason why he should not wish to say
> what we have been working on, and I expect if you ask
> him when he returns he will tell you. Until then, it
> wouldn't be totally fanciful to imagine that he and
> his assistants have been working on some of the things
> he said he would work on in his election platform. But
> however reasonable your request is, it's not within
> our rights to grant it without permission. I hope you
> understand.
>
> Cordus
>
> =====
>
>
> www.strategikon.org
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Plus
> For a better Internet experience
> http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
>
>
> 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: CC |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Decimus=20Iunius=20Silanus?= <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 11:27:29 +0100 (BST) |
|
Salve Francisce Apule,
> Diana, I think (IMHO) you wrong because this is not
> a conflict of
> interests, this is politic.
There is a difference between a serving magistrate
holding similar political views to the consul and
being tied to the same by an oath of loyalty. In my
opinion there is a clear conflict of interest in the
latter, especially amongst the more senior magisterial
positions - As an Aedile, you are charged with
upholding the rules and regulations pertaining to the
marketplace...as such, your loyalty should be to the
state and the state alone and you should be bound by
no oath to a sitting consul during your tenure of
office. This holds even more true for our praetors,
who are charged with upholding our judiciary and
monitoring the flow of speech in NR public forums.
> This is a free
> government appointed by Nova Romans in free
> elections. A factio wins,
> the other loose ... maybe in the next december the
> loosers will win
> the elections, this is Democracy.
Nova Roma is a Republic not a Democracy.
Vale
Decimus Iunius Silanus.
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Help with a Roman name |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Decimus=20Iunius=20Silanus?= <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 11:47:49 +0100 (BST) |
|
Salvete,
Can anyone help this chap. Please post all replies to
this list and then I can forward them to him directly.
Valete
Decimus Iunius Silanus
Scriba Censoris.
> > TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
> >
> > I found your website immensely fascinating. I
> study
> > ancient civilizations as a private passion. First
> and
> > foremost I study the mighty Persians. Then I deal
> > with Hellenic Rome (particularly as the Romans
> > pertained to the Middle East). Then I am
> interested
> > in early Christianity and the Byzantine period.
> But
> > anyway...
> >
> > I am curious what name you think would be
> appropriate
> > for me. My name is Rom Hashemi. I am ethnically
> > Persian and I am a Christian. My last name has
> > Semitic origins meaning in Hebrew "The Name of
> mine".
> > Bad grammar but "Hashem" is the way Jews referred
> to
> > God out of reverence (instead of saying "yahweh",
> > "elijah", or "jehova"). The name is also Arabic,
> > meaning "from the crusher of evil" it is also the
> name
> > of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad's tribe. I also
> study
> > at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville
> where I
> > have almost completed my two degrees in Middle
> Eastern
> > Studies and Political Science. I was born in
> > Columbia, Missouri. My career is pointing towards
> > law.
> >
> > I don't know - I was thinking something like:
> >
> > Romulus Hasemius(or Asemius) Jesus(or Pius)
> Persius
> > Columbius
> >
> > Let me know what you think. Thanks again.
> >
> > Excited,
> > Rom Hashemi
> >
> > =====
> > "Grant us prudence in proportion to our power,
> > Wisdom in proportion to our science,
> > Humaneness in proportion to our wealth and might."
> > -- Thomas Merton, excerpt from his prayer before
> the House of
> Representatives, 1962
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> >
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: A small remark turned into quite some issue ;) |
| From: |
"jachthondus" <rompy@xs4all.nl> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 10:39:43 -0000 |
|
Hello, dear Caius Municius Scaevola!
Before being pushed-off from the "Tarpeic-Rock" for having "critised"
the Honoured Rulers of this RM-micro-nation "too much", I hope that
they will give me the chance, (together with my last cigarette), to
thank YOU for your comment on my message in this mailing-list?!...
(I wouldn't put my hand in the fire for their allowance, though)!
And if my "faults" ever would lead to exile? I will ask Cicero-
himself to do his utmost to deny that we EVER "met" eachother on the
18th of May.
Fare thee well, my Friend!
Jachthondus.
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@c...>
wrote:
> Salve, Jachthondus -
>
> On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 10:13:36AM -0000, jachthondus wrote:
> > Being a simple Rome-Freak,
> >
> > Am I allowed as to ask You, (Right-Honourable Senators, Consuls,
or-
> > Whatever" of this "Nova-Roma), were these conversations about
Your
> > private "Cursus Honorum" are leading us to?
>
> <chuckle> Just as my personal opinion, they're not supposed to lead
> anywhere. The context here is that some people on this list are
notable
> for their attempts to revise or distort history and fact, and others
> have simply assumed the thankless task of correcting their
> disinformation whenever they try to spread it. There's not much real
> content in it, just a little struggle for accuracy.
>
> > One more humble-remark; (if I may)?
> > Reading these messages, one doesn't get very happy about the
> > Historical-Roma-quality of this "Roma-micro-Nation".
>
> You know, that really is an interesting statement, all the more so
for
> the fact that it often gets repeated here. My perception - and it
may
> well be a mistaken one in which I'm more than willing to be
corrected -
> is that all the silly bickering *is* fairly close to what happened
in
> the past, despite our wishes to idealize Roman history (not that I
would
> have minded if NR _was_ a place where people acted much closer to
those
> ideals, but - oh well.) I think that it would benefit Nova Roma if
this
> was one of the things we chose *not* to emulate here, but this
seems to
> be the reality of the day.
>
>
> Vale,
> Caius Minucius Scaevola
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-
> Libertas inaestimabilis res est.
> Liberty is a thing beyond all price.
> -- Corpus Iuris Civilis: Digesta
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: CC |
| From: |
"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@libero.it> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 10:53:56 -0000 |
|
Salve Silanus,
> There is a difference between a serving magistrate
> holding similar political views to the consul and
> being tied to the same by an oath of loyalty. In my
> opinion there is a clear conflict of interest in the
> latter, especially amongst the more senior magisterial
> positions - As an Aedile, you are charged with
> upholding the rules and regulations pertaining to the
> marketplace...as such, your loyalty should be to the
> state and the state alone and you should be bound by
> no oath to a sitting consul during your tenure of
> office. This holds even more true for our praetors,
> who are charged with upholding our judiciary and
> monitoring the flow of speech in NR public forums.
So, do you mean my full job in Nova Roma is a conflict of interests?
Following your words, I can't be assistant of the Curator Araneum
and Propraetor Provinciae Italiae because my duties as Curule Aedile
could be meet the interests of the Curator Araneum and of the
Provincia Italia.
In the majority of the modern States the Ministries make own oath in
front of the State (President) and of the Premier (winner politic
man in the last election) and he have to follow the guidelines of
the Government. Thi sis what happen, I think...
However, Silanus, as our Trinbune Diana said, serving a Consul and
having imperium by a Magistracy is not uncostitutional in Nova Roma.
> Nova Roma is a Republic not a Democracy.
Republic is a political system, democracy is an ideal too and first
of all. There is big difference, the Republis is a way to apply the
Democracy. Do you mean the Nova Roman Res Publica is not democratic?
Vale
Fr,. Apulus Caesar
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: CC |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Decimus=20Iunius=20Silanus?= <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 12:13:52 +0100 (BST) |
|
Salve Francisce Apule,
> Following your words, I can't be assistant of the
> Curator Araneum
> and Propraetor Provinciae Italiae because my duties
> as Curule Aedile
> could be meet the interests of the Curator Araneum
> and of the
> Provincia Italia.
As propraetor, your oath is to the state, so there is
certainly no conflict there. You can also 'assist' the
Curator Aruneum to your hearts content, should you
desire to to do. My argument is that as a serving
senior magistrate, you should not be bound in oath to
any one individual. That is a clear conflict of
interest. How do you proceed if that individual
violates the laws of the Macellum as laid down by your
own edicts?
> However, Silanus, as our Trinbune Diana said,
> serving a Consul and
> having imperium by a Magistracy is not
> uncostitutional in Nova Roma.
Absolutely, though of course that doesn't make it
right :-)
> > Nova Roma is a Republic not a Democracy.
>
> Republic is a political system, democracy is an
> ideal too and first
> of all. There is big difference, the Republis is a
> way to apply the
> Democracy. Do you mean the Nova Roman Res Publica is
> not democratic?
I didn't make myself clear perhaps...my apologies.
Nova Roma emulates the ancient Roman Republic, we are
not here to emulate a modern democratic state. Most
constitutional experts would not consider the ancient
Republic a true democracy.
Vale
Decimus Iunius Silanus.
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Aerarium Saturni section |
| From: |
Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 07:48:46 -0400 |
|
The Aerarium Saturni section of the Web site has been updated with the
most recent information I have. Thank you for the reminder!
-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Roman Republic |
| From: |
"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 13:57:20 +0200 |
|
Salve Decime Iuni,
Just a small remark and a few questions for clarification.
<< I didn't make myself clear perhaps...my apologies. Nova Roma emulates the ancient Roman Republic, we are
not here to emulate a modern democratic state. Most constitutional experts would not consider the ancient Republic a true democracy. >>
You might not be aware of this, but in the past the false mantra "republic, not democracy" has frequently been hurled around here. I just wanted to make it clear once more - not to you, but to everyone in general - that these are not mutually exclusive. Compare: my hair is blonde, but it is also long. Not all long hair is blonde and not all blonde hair is long.
However, it is true that by many politicologists the ancient Republic would not be considered a democracy because women could not vote, there was slavery and only a small percentage had voting rights. But the site of Nova Roma explicitly states that we are here to recreate the best of ancient Rome, religion and culture in the first place. Do you think that we should follow the ancient model, and if so, in what aspects? Or, as an additional question, do you dislike the concept of a 21st century democracy and for what reasons? Mind you, I am not trying to make you sound suspicious, I'm just asking these questions because I'd like to have clarifications with regards to your viewpoints.
Optime vale,
Marcus Octavius Solaris Draco
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Peculiar things... |
| From: |
"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 13:46:06 +0200 |
|
Salvete Quirites,
Let me first make it clear here that I don't belong to Quintilianus' cohors, nor do I belong to those who so fiercely oppose him. I am a scriba of Fortunatus, the other consul, but I'm not speaking on his behalf and I'm not writing this mail from my 'job' as scriba (actually he just hired me as a Latin dude).
Quintilianus' opponents have to explain me something. When he appointed his large consular staff a huge outcry followed, accusing Quintilianus of forming some sort of mafia, with all kinds of shady arguments and assertions which have, hithereto, not been proven. It seems like everything he does is automatically suspicious (although there is no proof of anything and no one is coureageous enough to point the finger and make a concrete accusation of something he allegedly did or is doing wrong). But now it gets even funnier: everything he *doesn't* do is suspicious too! He can never do anything good, I suppose, for his loyal opponents. I think his hard-headed adversaries have forgotten his Academia Thules initiative, which was unparallelled by any other in Nova Roma. Or the fact that he, as an aedilis last year, revitalised the ludi circenses and attracted capable webmasters to make their websites. He did more than any other aedilis had done before him and set a new standard for future aediles to live up to.
I recall that there once was a time here when criticising the so-called 'zombie magistrates' was considered not done. 'Zombie magistrates' were the type of lads and lasses who, once elected, did *absolutely nothing* but collecting mothballs and - when they felt like it - voting in the Senate, to which they had been elevated although they had done nothing more than being elected. There are numerous examples in the lists and annals of ex-magistrates no one has ever heard of. Luckily times have changed for the better in this respect, but I simply remark that among those who now criticise the senior consul, there are people who used to defend the 'zombie magistrates' two years back.
But let me ask Quintilianus' opponents another question: what is it that you really *expect* him to do? No one seems to have concrete proposals, except for Sulla who hinted at creating legislation to leave his mark, but I think we will all agree that you can't just make legislation for the sake of making legislation. Let me tell you this, however: I, *too*, await some results of a consular staff of 25 people but you'll all have to admit that we're not even halfway the year yet, and you'd be holding Quintilianus to higher standards than you ever held former magistrates by.
I would like to note that the "poor-me"-argument expressed by some that there is a certain fear to speak up against the senior consul because there is a risk that you'll get 25 people all over you, is very feeble. For instance, only three, maybe four people of the consular cohors usually react. And surely if your critical arguments are sound and undeniably correct they can only be squelched by an overwhelming mass hysteria - which has *not* occurred.
In concluding, I'd like to invite everyone to simply wait and see what this year's magistrates will do. It's good they are being reminded every now and then of their duties, but we will have to wait until the year is over to make a final assessment.
Optime valete,
M. Octavius Solaris Draco
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Two questions on Roman History |
| From: |
PADRUIGTHEUNCLE@aol.com |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 08:22:03 -0400 |
|
Dear Cousin:
I would say that the answer to the first part of your question would be Augustus. He structure the Principate to restore as much of the best part of the Republic as he could while keeping power in his hands for the good of the Roman people. He stabilized the Roman state after a period of over 100 years of internal chaos and intercine warfare. He restored temples and public buildings; settled the Spanish revolts; and attempted to expand the territory of Rome.
In regards to your second question, Marius was the most outstanding personality that led to the civil wars by opening the legions to the disfranchised and the poor. His action took the lower classes (who primarily fought as velites and slingers in the Servian armies) and out of the direct control of their ancestral patrons. By making them the swords of Rome, he gave them the power to back successful generals for positions of power and led them to hold the Senate in contempt.
Flavi Galeri
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Republic |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Decimus=20Iunius=20Silanus?= <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 13:43:58 +0100 (BST) |
|
Salve Marce Octavi,
> You might not be aware of this, but in the past the
> false mantra "republic, not democracy" has
> frequently been hurled around here. I just wanted to
> make it clear once more - not to you, but to
> everyone in general - that these are not mutually
> exclusive.
Certainly not mutually exclusve in the modern sense of
the terms republic and democracy...however the Roman
Republic was far from a democractic by modern
standards.
> However, it is true that by many politicologists the
> ancient Republic would not be considered a democracy
> because women could not vote, there was slavery and
> only a small percentage had voting rights.
Further, those voting rights were skewed in terms of
the wealth of the voter.
> But the
> site of Nova Roma explicitly states that we are here
> to recreate the best of ancient Rome, religion and
> culture in the first place. Do you think that we
> should follow the ancient model, and if so, in what
> aspects?
Ok hands up....I'm guilty. As imperfect as it may seem
by todays moral sensibilities, I have a great degree
of respect and admiration of the Roman political
system. What they achieved is amazing, especially
given the technology of the age. As yes, I want to
recreate it as near as damn it...thats why I am here.
If I wanted to help create a modern democratic
republic, I would be elsewhere.
BTW, if we had slavery, state sponsered sexual
discrimination or simply threw citizens off the
tarpeian rock because we felt like it, I would not be
here then either. We all have our own opinions as to
what constitutes the 'best' of Rome. Its about as
subjective as you can get. These are just some of my
opinions.
> Or, as an additional question, do you
> dislike the concept of a 21st century democracy and
> for what reasons?
I don't dislike it at all. If anything, I have a
passionate dislike towards my own nations hereditary
head of state system. But then again if NR were
attempting to recreate the principate, I would not be
here either.
> Mind you, I am not trying to make
> you sound suspicious, I'm just asking these
> questions because I'd like to have clarifications
> with regards to your viewpoints.
Then you could have mailed me privately of course :-)
Vale
Decimus Iunius Silanus
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Republic |
| From: |
"M. Octavius Solaris" <scorpioinvictus@hotmail.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 15:01:23 +0200 |
|
Salve Decime Iuni,
[snip]
<< Ok hands up....I'm guilty. As imperfect as it may seem
by todays moral sensibilities, I have a great degree
of respect and admiration of the Roman political
system. What they achieved is amazing, especially
given the technology of the age. As yes, I want to
recreate it as near as damn it...thats why I am here.
If I wanted to help create a modern democratic
republic, I would be elsewhere.
BTW, if we had slavery, state sponsered sexual
discrimination or simply threw citizens off the
tarpeian rock because we felt like it, I would not be
here then either. We all have our own opinions as to
what constitutes the 'best' of Rome. Its about as
subjective as you can get. These are just some of my
opinions. >>
MOS: Okay, point taken!
[snip]
> Mind you, I am not trying to make
> you sound suspicious, I'm just asking these
> questions because I'd like to have clarifications
> with regards to your viewpoints.
<< Then you could have mailed me privately of course :-) >>
MOS: Certainly. But since your statement was a public one, I responded in public. I usually work that way. I'm a very simple man, lol :).
Optime vale!
M. Octavius Solaris Draco
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: CC |
| From: |
"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=" <cordus@strategikon.org> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 14:20:46 +0100 (BST) |
|
A. Apollonius Cordus to D. Iunius Silanus and all
citizens and peregrines, greetings.
> As propraetor, your oath is to the state, so there
is
> certainly no conflict there. You can also 'assist'
> the Curator Aruneum to your hearts content, should
> you desire to to do. My argument is that as a
serving
> senior magistrate, you should not be bound in oath
to
> any one individual. That is a clear conflict of
> interest. How do you proceed if that individual
> violates the laws of the Macellum as laid down by
> your own edicts?
If I may, I'd like to repeat a remark I made earlier
concerning the assistants' oath. It is true that a
magistrate, oath-bound to serve the best interests of
the state, who is also an assistant to another
magistrate, and oath-bound to act in the best
interests of that magistrate during his or her term as
assistant, could conceivably come into a position in
which those two oaths conflict.
If this were to occur, there would be no great crisis.
The person in question would have to resign from one
or other of those offices, thereby cancelling the
relevant oath. To decide which position to resign, he
or she would have to consider whether it would be more
in the interests of the state and of the other
magistrate to continue to serve the state or to
continue to serve the magistrate.
Imagine a certain Albinus who is a Praetor and also an
assistant to a Censor. If he were in such a position,
he might think, 'well, I am a good Praetor, there is a
major court case coming up which will need my
attention, and it would be very disruptive to the
state for me to resign as Praetor; on the other hand,
the Censor is doing fine and doesn't need me that
much; so I'll resign from his staff and stay on as
Praetor'. Alternatively, Albinus might think, 'the
census is coming up, and the Censor will need all the
help he can get; as Praetor, I haven't really been
doing much lately and the year's nearly over; so I'll
resign my Praetorship and stay helping the Censor'.
Neither of these decisions would break either of
Albinus' oaths, and either way he would no longer have
a conflict of interests. Fairly straightforward,
really.
Cordus
=====
www.strategikon.org
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: A small remark turned into quite some issue ;) |
| From: |
Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 09:38:36 -0400 |
|
On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 10:39:43AM -0000, jachthondus wrote:
> Hello, dear Caius Municius Scaevola!
Salve, Jachthondus!
> Before being pushed-off from the "Tarpeic-Rock" for having "critised"
> the Honoured Rulers of this RM-micro-nation "too much", I hope that
> they will give me the chance, (together with my last cigarette), to
> thank YOU for your comment on my message in this mailing-list?!...
<laugh> You're more than welcome. Fortunately for us both, no one seems
to know where the Tarpeian Rock is around here, or several people bodies
- almost certainly including mine - would be lying, broken and pierced,
on the rocks and shoals of jagged rhetoric.
> (I wouldn't put my hand in the fire for their allowance, though)!
<LOL> Despite my name, neither would I; I'd hold out for a far loftier
goal. I didn't pick my cognomen lightly.
> And if my "faults" ever would lead to exile? I will ask Cicero-
> himself to do his utmost to deny that we EVER "met" eachother on the
> 18th of May.
Heh. I'm really getting a wonderful chuckle out of your sense of humor -
history by implication... as long you avoid the terror squads roaming
the streets, all will be fine. :)
> Fare thee well, my Friend!
And you as well.
Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Quam bene vivas refert, non quam diu.
The important thing isn't how long you live, but how well you live.
-- Seneca Philosophus, "Epistulae"
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 10:00:00 -0400 |
|
Salve, Tiberius Galerius Paulinus -
On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 11:24:50PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Salve
>
> I have a question. I know that the Senior Consul holds the Fasces for May,
> but does he have to? If he is going to be absent can't he and the junior
> Consul swap months. In the Ancient Republic didn't one Consul remain in Rome
> to govern while the other attended to the military campaign of the moment? I
> know that both were equally in command on different days but both left only
> when Rome was fighting on two fronts.
>
> We have a system of twin executives can this not meet the needs of a absents
> of one?
That's a fairly good question if considered on a broader scale than that
of the present moment, actually. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing an
edict or a law that would grease the wheels of that particular
mechanism, just in case of future need. However, some relevant questions
would be:
1) How long of an absence would be considered sufficient for this
purpose? What happens if an absence that was planned as short-term (say,
a day short of whatever the limit happens to be) gets extended by a
continued (or new) emergency?
2) What happens if a Consul has emergencies come up for two months in a
row? Does the other Consul hold the fasces straight through, and is that
a fair load on him?
Just to bring things back to the present for the moment, I don't believe
that the Consul's current absence would meet any reasonable definition
of point 1. But these are, I think, interesting and important questions.
Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Audentes fortuna iuvat.
Fortune favours the brave.
-- Vergil, "Aenis"
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: CC |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Decimus=20Iunius=20Silanus?= <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 15:13:09 +0100 (BST) |
|
Salve Aule Apolloni,
Your example resides on the fact that a conflict of
interest requires a 'trigger' or 'incident' to come in
effect. However, in your example, praetor Albinus also
happens to be responsible for moderation of Nova
Roma's Main List...our main channel of communication.
To ammend your example slightly, Albinus now works for
a senior consul and is included in a team of
individuals who regularly engage in political debate
on this channel. Conflict of interest? I personally
think so.
Anyways, specific examples sometimes offer little to
enhance an argument one way or another. We have both
provided examples that provide evidence of this in
this instance. Generally speaking, you do not see the
oaths as problematic because there is always the
option to resign should a trigger activate the
conflict of interest. I personally would rather that
we should not arrive in that juncture in the first
place. Magistracies and appointed positions should not
be entered into lightly and I personally would
consider a resignation of a magistracy only in extreme
or unavoidable circumstances.
Vale
Decimus Iunius Silanus.
> If I may, I'd like to repeat a remark I made earlier
> concerning the assistants' oath. It is true that a
> magistrate, oath-bound to serve the best interests
> of
> the state, who is also an assistant to another
> magistrate, and oath-bound to act in the best
> interests of that magistrate during his or her term
> as
> assistant, could conceivably come into a position in
> which those two oaths conflict.
>
> If this were to occur, there would be no great
> crisis.
> The person in question would have to resign from one
> or other of those offices, thereby cancelling the
> relevant oath. To decide which position to resign,
> he
> or she would have to consider whether it would be
> more
> in the interests of the state and of the other
> magistrate to continue to serve the state or to
> continue to serve the magistrate.
>
> Imagine a certain Albinus who is a Praetor and also
> an
> assistant to a Censor. If he were in such a
> position,
> he might think, 'well, I am a good Praetor, there is
> a
> major court case coming up which will need my
> attention, and it would be very disruptive to the
> state for me to resign as Praetor; on the other
> hand,
> the Censor is doing fine and doesn't need me that
> much; so I'll resign from his staff and stay on as
> Praetor'. Alternatively, Albinus might think, 'the
> census is coming up, and the Censor will need all
> the
> help he can get; as Praetor, I haven't really been
> doing much lately and the year's nearly over; so
> I'll
> resign my Praetorship and stay helping the Censor'.
> Neither of these decisions would break either of
> Albinus' oaths, and either way he would no longer
> have
> a conflict of interests. Fairly straightforward,
> really.
>
> Cordus
>
> =====
>
>
> www.strategikon.org
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Plus
> For a better Internet experience
> http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
>
> ------------------------ 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
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Away |
| From: |
Diana Moravia Aventina <diana_aventina@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 07:35:34 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve Franciscus Apulus, While I
agree that the below topics are every
interesting, I dont think it is a good idea to
try to suppress people when they feel that
something is not quite right. A lot of us have
been active in this discussion - from your side
too-- and yet you left those names and pointed
out Sulla as if he is trouble maker number one,
when actually I am the one who started this
discussion :-p Honestly it
is pretty obvious why you want to change the
subject (you're on the Senior Consul's staff no?)
and I cant blame you, but once agai you seem to
confuse the job of an Aedile for a Praetor:it is
their job to tell citizens when enough is enough
and to change the subject. Vale, Diana Moravia
Aventina
> Hey,
Sulla, maybe we could talk about Ancient
> Rome, Classic Culture,
> live events, archeology, History, military
> strategies, classes and
> historical training, latin language, Religio,
> roman Tresuries,
> restoration of Temple of Magna Mater,
> organization of galleries and
> museums, books, relationships between Rome and
> other cultures,
> salvation of the cultural and historical
> patrimony, roman life,
> philosophy, roman astrology, satire, theatre
> and latin writers,
> etc. ;-) This topics bore you? LOL
>
> Vale
> FAC
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Proposal for the LEX FABIA DE CENSO (on the Census) and future |
| From: |
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <christer.edling@telia.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 16:54:13 +0200 |
|
Salvete Quirites!
I am back from a short visit to Berlin in Germany and is quite
astonished that my five days trip to Berlin (2000 km away) seem to
have left some citizens very confused and worried. I am sure that
most of the previous Consuls have left their home for many more and
longer trips during their term without this becoming such a big
circus.
I am of course flattered by the importance some seem to give me as a
person, but I am sure that my respected and competent Consular
Colleague Illustrus Titus Labienus Fortunatus was and will be able to
keep the rudder of the Res Publica on a steady course for the few
days I had, and will have to, go away. As I will do for him when he
is away.
I will soon further address the discussion about my Cohors and work
as Senior Consul. But I start my argument for this new Census law by
publishing my article from "Roman Times" from April 1st.
It is sad to see that my efforts to keep all the citizens informed of
my plans and activities has passed unnoticed by so many, as this
article also mentions some of my future plans for legislation. Please
observe in the future that Roman Times always will _continue_ to
strive to keep all citizens informed of my plans and projects. Please
read "Roman Times"!!! http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
.
****************
Census Reform - Activating Cives, energizing Provinciae
My colleague and I have, as he has already said in the "Roman Eagle,"
found a good sound base to work on. I feel privileged to be able to
concentrate on constructive issues, as fights between us, the Consuls
of Nova Roma, are not likely to happen.
I will address the first legislative proposal that will take up a lot
of my time during the next month.
My "Officina Iuris et Rei Politicae" (Law and Politics Office) has
prepared a new Census law after my instructions. What was wrong with
the old one, you may ask? I think that there were two major problems.
First the fact that the old law would have been too expensive to
execute, and then nothing was said about what should happen with
those citizens that didn't respond during the Census.
I think that by using the Provincial administrations, the Census
would be both more effective and also cheaper than building a new
Censorial organisation just for the Census. Still there are some
Provinces that will need the help of the Censors, those without a
Provincial administration and those with an insufficient one. So
there will still be work to do for the Censors during the Census.
When the Census was discussed I found a couple of things that would
be problems if we didn't take care of our passive citizens. Those are
the citizens that will not answer to the call of the Census, but
don't actively resign their citizenship. Among this category we have
found that quite a few will return later.
I think that we should allow these passive citizens an easy way to
keep their Roman name and the chance to come back as active citizens.
I have decided to call these citizens that don't answer the Census,
but do not resign as citizens either, socii.
This means "allies," and will leave the door open to a group that
probably will be quite easy to recruit active citizens from when they
want to reactivate themselves. I also see these passive citizens as a
group that has already taken a positive stand _for_ Nova Roma, and
because of this I want to be able to use them to reinforce the
impression that Nova Roma is a force to reckon with.
There are those who think that the socii just will make an impression
of weakness. I see it another way. A micronation with 600 (acive)
citizens and 1200 (supportive) socii seems stronger that a
micronation with only 600 citizens. That was a fact in Roma Antiqua,
and is a fact even now.
After the Census Law I will present a new law for the election of
Magistrates and for legislation in the Comitia Centuriata, and after
that a new law about "local groups". My Cohors is at the moment also
looking into a few other interesting areas to deal with. I will also
continue to keep in touch with other magistrates within Nova Roma,
and individuals outside Nova Roma, with the goal to improve our
position in the future.
--
Vale
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Consul et Senator
Propraetor Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Cohors Consulis CFQ
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: Away |
| From: |
"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@libero.it> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 15:11:20 -0000 |
|
Salve Diana,
once again you disinformed the content of the message not reading
the previous messages.
This was an answer to a direct question to me written by Sulla
Never I invited to the silence Illustrus Senator Sulla, each of us
have the freedom of speech and I'm not the judge able to keep in
silence a Senator.
I just said that the continuos discussions like these are boring me
and I would like to read more messages about the below issues.
During the 16th May, Sulla written 15 messages about this discussion
and just one about the Ancient Rome, Our topic.
But he's free to talk about everything here, I only suggested him
other topics with clear emoticons in the end of the message (;-) and
LOL mean "joke").
Where you have readen my becoming Praetor or my suppressing the
people?
Please, Diana, try to be honest really! ;-)
Vale
Fr. Apulus Caesar
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Diana Moravia Aventina
<diana_aventina@y...> wrote:
> Salve Franciscus Apulus, While I
> agree that the below topics are every
> interesting, I dont think it is a good idea to
> try to suppress people when they feel that
> something is not quite right. A lot of us have
> been active in this discussion - from your side
> too-- and yet you left those names and pointed
> out Sulla as if he is trouble maker number one,
> when actually I am the one who started this
> discussion :-p Honestly it
> is pretty obvious why you want to change the
> subject (you're on the Senior Consul's staff no?)
> and I cant blame you, but once agai you seem to
> confuse the job of an Aedile for a Praetor:it is
> their job to tell citizens when enough is enough
> and to change the subject. Vale, Diana Moravia
> Aventina
> > Hey,
> Sulla, maybe we could talk about Ancient
> > Rome, Classic Culture,
> > live events, archeology, History, military
> > strategies, classes and
> > historical training, latin language, Religio,
> > roman Tresuries,
> > restoration of Temple of Magna Mater,
> > organization of galleries and
> > museums, books, relationships between Rome and
> > other cultures,
> > salvation of the cultural and historical
> > patrimony, roman life,
> > philosophy, roman astrology, satire, theatre
> > and latin writers,
> > etc. ;-) This topics bore you? LOL
> >
> > Vale
> > FAC
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.com
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Help with a Roman name |
| From: |
jan gram <janabc10@yahoo.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 08:48:36 -0700 (PDT) |
|
Salve:
My suggestion is the following:
If you like to join the NR republic then you may choose a nomen from the many families you see in the album gentium.
If you preffer to found your own family, and bear in mind it entails some responsibilities, for a praenomen look up the Nova Roma list of praenomina as these were not names in the modern sense and were rather more like nicknames: Gnaeus, Gaius, Marcus etc..
For a nomen you could use: Hashemius. There is precedence to this you may know. Josephus (the historian) is a hebrew name that was romanized. and Parthicus for cognomen. Don't add an agnomen unless it is bestowed on you by a magistrate or you'll sound pretentious.
Decimus Iunius Silanus <danedwardsuk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Salvete,
Can anyone help this chap. Please post all replies to
this list and then I can forward them to him directly.
Valete
Decimus Iunius Silanus
Scriba Censoris.
> > TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
> >
> > I found your website immensely fascinating. I
> study
> > ancient civilizations as a private passion. First
> and
> > foremost I study the mighty Persians. Then I deal
> > with Hellenic Rome (particularly as the Romans
> > pertained to the Middle East). Then I am
> interested
> > in early Christianity and the Byzantine period.
> But
> > anyway...
> >
> > I am curious what name you think would be
> appropriate
> > for me. My name is Rom Hashemi. I am ethnically
> > Persian and I am a Christian. My last name has
> > Semitic origins meaning in Hebrew "The Name of
> mine".
> > Bad grammar but "Hashem" is the way Jews referred
> to
> > God out of reverence (instead of saying "yahweh",
> > "elijah", or "jehova"). The name is also Arabic,
> > meaning "from the crusher of evil" it is also the
> name
> > of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad's tribe. I also
> study
> > at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville
> where I
> > have almost completed my two degrees in Middle
> Eastern
> > Studies and Political Science. I was born in
> > Columbia, Missouri. My career is pointing towards
> > law.
> >
> > I don't know - I was thinking something like:
> >
> > Romulus Hasemius(or Asemius) Jesus(or Pius)
> Persius
> > Columbius
> >
> > Let me know what you think. Thanks again.
> >
> > Excited,
> > Rom Hashemi
> >
> > =====
> > "Grant us prudence in proportion to our power,
> > Wisdom in proportion to our science,
> > Humaneness in proportion to our wealth and might."
> > -- Thomas Merton, excerpt from his prayer before
> the House of
> Representatives, 1962
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> >
__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
"deciusiunius" <bcatfd@together.net> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 16:41:22 -0000 |
|
Secopnd attempt to send...
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:
> Salve
Salve,
> I have a question. I know that the Senior Consul holds the Fasces
for May,
> but does he have to? If he is going to be absent can't he and the
junior
> Consul swap months. In the Ancient Republic didn't one Consul
remain in Rome
> to govern while the other attended to the military campaign of the
moment? I
> know that both were equally in command on different days but both
left only
> when Rome was fighting on two fronts.
>
> We have a system of twin executives can this not meet the needs of
a absents
> of one?
Absolutely. The passing of the fasces is merely a phrase of
convienience to give one consul a break for a month and a way to
revive an ancient tradition. Nothing binds either consul to abide by
it. It wasn't used in NR until 2000 by Fabius and Audens. Vedius et
Cassius did not do it during their second consulship in 2001. It is
merely a custom that some consuls choose to honor.
During a period of absence by one consul, the other should assume all
duties that are necessary. However, I don't think that necessarily
means promulgating legislation on behalf of the other unless they
worked on the legislation together. In such a case, the absent consul
should delegate a member of his staff to speak for him on what he has
been working on or be left open to the type of arguably justifiable
criticism we have seen here.
Decius Iunius Palladius
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] [NovaRoma-Announce] CALL FOR COMITIA POPULI TRIBUTA: Edictum |
| From: |
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <christer.edling@telia.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 17:11:25 +0200 |
|
Ex Officio Consulis Senioris Caesonis Fabii Quintiliani
Edictum Consulare CFQ VII de Comitiorum Populi Tributorum Convocatione
As the auspices are favourable the Comitia Populi Tributa is hereby
convened to pass the following "Lex Fabia de Censo".
I. Formal debate (Contio) shall begin at 18.00 Roman time Monday the
19th of May
II. Voting shall begin at 18.00 Roman time Saturday the 24th of May.
III. Voting shall end at 18.00 Roman time Thursday the 29th of May
IV. LEX FABIA DE CENSO (on the Census)
The Lex Cornelia de Censo is hereby superceded with this Lex Fabia.
Pursuant to the Constitution of Nova Roma (II.A. 4 and IV.A.1.b) the
following law is hereby enacted to determine accurately the number of
citizens who make up Nova Roma.
I. A Census of all citizens of Nova Roma should be done every 2
years. This would be the responsibility of the Censors.
II. The Nova Roma Census will last for a period of 16 weeks, and must
be completed by the "Pridie Kal. Novembris" (the 31st of October).
The start and end of the Census period will be announced by the
Censors on the NR website, official lists, and in the major forums.
The official lists are currently located at nova-roma@yahoogroups.com
and NovaRoma-Announce@yahoogroups.com. Notification must also be
published on the Nova Roma Message board. The Censors shall also ask
the Governors to announce the Census period on the provincial level.
III. The Census will consist of the following:
Those who meet any of the following criteria will still be considered citizens:
1. Those who voted in the main election (in November and/or December)
2. Those who have paid taxes for the current calendar year
3. Patres Familias who have successfully responded to the yearly
registration of the Lex Cornelia de Tabulis Gentium Novaromanarum
Agendis
4. Persons who became citizens during the current calendar year
5. Persons who are successfully contacted as described in section IV.
IV. "Inactive" citizens are those who fail to meet at least one of
the conditions in III. The following will lay down some of the
procedures to contact inactive citizens. Inactive citizens are those
who will need to be contacted by the National Census. The following
methods will be used to contact inactive citizens:
A. Bulk Email. At least two attempts should be done to contact
citizen via this avenue.
B. Surface mail. "Inactive" Citizens who are unreachable by email
shall receive a mailing. This shall be done on the provincial level
by Governors and legati under the supervision of the Censors. In
those Provinciae where there aare not a Governor and in those areas
not included in a Provincia yet the Censors shall ask a Governor of a
Provincia as near as possible to where that "inactive" Citizen lives.
If this is not possible it shall be
done by the Censors. Surface mail information should be forwarded to
whatever official Nova Roman address that is specified by the
Censors. Surface mail information must reach the Censors before the
"Pridie Kal. Novembris" (the 31st of October). The Current Official
address of all Nova Roman Mail correspondence is:
Nova Roma
P.O. Box 1897
Wells, ME 04090
At the time of the passage of this lex, the above address is the
official address; if the official address changes in the future, the
new address should be utilized.
C. Phone calls. If a Citizen is unreachable by e-mail or surface
mail, he/she shall be contacted by phone. This shall be done on the
provincial level by Governors and legati under the supervision of the
Censors. In those Provinciae where there is not a Governor and in
those areas not included in a Provincia yet this shall be optional,
and it can be done by the Governor of a Provincia as near as possible
to where the "inactive" Citizen lives upon request of the Censors, or
by a Censors themself.
D. A temporary banner and link will be put on the main Nova Roma
website for the duration of the Census, where individual citizens may
input their information to comply with the Census. Further, the
Censors shall recommend such a banner and link to be put on any other
Nova Roman website (Provinces, Magistrates, Sodalitates)
V. All communicated information pertaining to the Census shall be
noted in a database on the Nova Roma Website, the address of which
will be specified by the Censores at the beginning of the
Registration Period. Citizen information may be entered into this
database by the Censores, their appointed assistants, or by the
individual citizens.
VI. By the "Pridie Kal. Septembris" (the 30st of September)., the
Censors should post a list to the official email lists of Nova Roma
displaying the names of those citizens who have failed to respond.
VII. If a citizen fails to respond to the contact attempts, that
person will be considered a "Socius" (Ally), but not a citizen. If
he/she is a Pater/Mater Familias, he/she immediately lose this
position and the Censors will abide by the Constitution, any laws,
and any Censorial edict if the appointment of a Pater Familias is
necessary. However, the Censors have the discretion to waive this
clause if both Censors feel there are legitimate reasons for the
citizen to remain incommunicado.
VIII. If a citizen knows of an extended period of unavailability that
will coincide with the census, he may contact the Censors up to 3
months before the census is to begin to inform them of his active
status and his desire to be counted in the census. Such contact will
be considered by the Censors as having fulfilled the citizen's duty
to reply during the census period. Proxies are not permitted during
the National Census effort.
IX. At any time, a Socius may contact the Censores and ask to regain
his/her Citizenship, which will then be granted unless there are
compelling reasons otherwise.
X. In the Album Civium it shall be clearly indicated whether an
individual is a Civis (citizen) or a Socius.
XI. At the end of the National Census Postage or Telephone expenses
incurred by the magistrate will be reimbursed by either a monetary
payment or a tax credit. All such payments or credits are done in
exchange for reciepts, reciept copies and bills (if reciepts are not
possible to get) and must be approved by the Senate.
It will be up to the Censors to choose which of these two methods to
follow to compensate the other involved magistrates, according to
criteria of saving. Further it will be up to the Senate to authorize
payout.
It shall be up to the Senate to choose which of these two methods to
follow to compensate the Censors, according to criteria of saving.
XII. A budget shall be allocated by the Senate to meet expenses to
compensate magistrates involved in the Census.
XIII. The First Census will take place during the Consulship of Caeso
Fabius Quintilianus and Titus Labienus Fortunatus (2756 AUC).
***********
Given 10th of January, in the year of the Consulship of Caeso Fabius
Quintilianus and Titus Labienus Fortunatus, 2756 AUC.
--
Vale
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Consul et Senator
Propraetor Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
************************************************
Cohors Consulis CFQ
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
NovaRoma-Announce-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
Vale
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Consul et Senator
Propraetor Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Cohors Consulis CFQ
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
"deciusiunius" <bcatfd@together.net> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 15:37:40 -0000 |
|
--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:
> Salve
>
> I have a question. I know that the Senior Consul holds the Fasces
for May,
> but does he have to? If he is going to be absent can't he and the
junior
> Consul swap months. In the Ancient Republic didn't one Consul
remain in Rome
> to govern while the other attended to the military campaign of the
moment? I
> know that both were equally in command on different days but both
left only
> when Rome was fighting on two fronts.
>
> We have a system of twin executives can this not meet the needs of
a absents
> of one?
Absolutely. The passing of the fasces is merely a phrase of
convienience to give one consul a break for a month and a way to
revive an ancient tradition. Nothing binds either consul to abide by
it. It wasn't used in NR until 2000 by Fabius and Audens. Vedius et
Cassius did not do it during their second consulship. It is merely a
custom that some consuls choose to honor.
During a period of absence by one consul, the other should assume all
duties that are necessary. Howevber, I don't think that necessarily
means promulgating legislation on behalf of the other unless they
worked on legislation together. In such a case, the absent consul
should delegate a member of his staff to speak for him on what he has
been working on or be left open to the type of arguably justifiable
criticism we have seen here.
Decius Iunius Palladius
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus <christer.edling@telia.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 22:00:57 +0200 |
|
Salve Honorable G. Modius Athanasius!
>For the record I like the Senior Consul. I do not belong to any faction that
>serves to officially oppose him.
I appreciate You and your attitude and the feelings are mutual!
>I do think his extremely large group of
>advisors is too much, but its his choice to make.
I admit that my Cohors is an experiment, remember that my Cohors is
the first really organised staff of any Consul in Nova Roma's
history. But I never thought that it would be perfect from the
beginning. But as have been said before the size of a staff really
doesn't matter, both a small or big staff can do both a good or a bad
job. Though I do think that my Cohors will get the approval of most
when we can see the end result.
>It does, however, send up
>a few red flags -- in my opinion -- when nothing has been presented to the
>populace. He has also been pretty silent on the main list.
As You see I am getting the proposals out now, expect more proposals
in July and September. But it is not just to present laws there is a
lot of work before the laws are ready to be presented. We have seen a
lot of laws that were badly prepared in Nova Roma before. I will try
to not do that mistake.
>So what I would propose. . . .Instead of spending all the time and effort
>responding to criticism, work on those projects that should be presented to
>the whole citizenry.
This is a very good proposal and it will now be done with the
election law and "local groups" law as soon as I have fixed the last
paragraphs.
>I would image I can speak for several -- who feel as I
>do -- that the back and forth e-mails is getting out of hand.
You can be sure that I will not take any part of it, as it is below
my Dignitas. I will let my actions speak for me, but I _do_ need You
to have patience for a couple of weeks.
>We would like
>to SEE something. Additionally, I do not understand "not at liberty to
>say..." A simple checklist of..."we are working on this, this, and this. We
>are almost done with A, and project B is about half done."
This list has been published in Roman Times and I don't keep my
Accensi that hard. I think that my Accensi really love their work and
hope that their work will be best presented by me, because of that
they prefer to have me to answer questions.
By the way don't You think it is strange that all this discussion (I
know it wasn't started by You) came up when EVERYBODY knew that I
would be gone?
>I would also like to mention that Nova Roma has more than one Consul,
Also remember that there is a big difference between this year's
Consular pair and last year's, as my colleague and I cooperate very
well and the cooperation of last year's pair collapsed after about a
half year.
>and we
>have Praetor's who can assist in leading our Republic. I have to confess,
>that I do see a DIFFERENCE between the leadership this year and the
>leadership from last year (hats off to Octavius and Sulla). But I remain
>patiently optimistic.
My hat is off for Illustrus Marcus Octavius Germanicus.
>In closing I would caution you Caius Minucius Scaevola. Please do not take
>the same defensive, and attacking posture with me as you do with Sulla --
>what I mention here today, I would gladly bring up whether the Senior Consul
>is present or not.
I am very sure that You always will act with honor and it is a
pleasure to try to answer your questions.
>I voted for the Senior Consul, and I have a right to say
>what I have to say.
I thank for your vote and I will do everything to deserve it! I will
always defend your and everybody else's right to say whatever you
want!
>Let us see some action.
You will!
>In Fellowship & Peace:
>
>G. Modius Athanasius
>Flamen Pomonalis
--
Vale
Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Consul et Senator
Propraetor Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Cohors Consulis CFQ
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
|
| Subject: |
[Nova-Roma] searching informations about Magna Mater |
| From: |
"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@libero.it> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 16:50:48 -0000 |
|
Salvete Omnes,
as you know my Cohors Aedilis is fully engaged in the Project of
Restoration of the Temple of Magna Mater.
We are working to meet as soon as possible the Director of the
Palatine Ruins, Prof. Pensabene, and the chief architect. Illustrus
Ilius Perusianus maybe will fix the meeting for the next weeks.
But before to meet them, we would like to have detailed archive of
informations about the Temple and Magna Mater.
Perusianus and my staff searched several informations about the
cult, the history of the Temple and the location. Perusianus was a
lot of time in Palatine making several photos. Everything is
published at http://aediles.novaroma.org/apulus/project/ and
http://italia.novaroma.org/cohorsaedilis/ludi/templemagnamater.htm
But it's never enough :-)
If you have informations, studies, images, news, etc. about the
architectural structure of the Temple, the history of the ruins, of
the religious cult, etc. please contact me at fraelov@yahoo.it
Everything will be appreciated.
We hope to give you a report of the work in progress about the
Temple, please wait for.
Thank you again
Vale
Fr. Apulus Caesar
Senior Curule Aedile
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] searching informations about Magna Mater |
| From: |
Gnaeus Octavius Noricus <cn.octavius.noricus@gmx.at> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 23:33:05 +0200 |
|
On Mon, 19 May 2003 16:50:48 -0000, Franciscus Apulus Caesar wrote:
>We are working to meet as soon as possible the Director of the
>Palatine Ruins, Prof. Pensabene,
Sorry for my useless post, but I have to state publicly that this is
a very fitting (and funny) name for a professor. ;-)
--
Optime vale!
Gnaeus Octavius Noricus
cn.octavius.noricus@gmx.at
19.05.2003 23:30:58
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Aerarium Saturni section |
| From: |
=?iso-8859-1?q?Titus=20Arminius=20Genialis?= <tagenialis@yahoo.com.br> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 19:10:53 -0300 (ART) |
|
Salve Senatrix.
I tried to see the up-to-date information, however I received a "Not Found" message when trying http://www.novaroma.org/aerarium_saturni/2755financials.html.
Vale bene.
Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org> wrote:
The Aerarium Saturni section of the Web site has been updated with the
most recent information I have. Thank you for the reminder!
-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org
Titus Arminius Genialis.
tagenialis@yahoo.com.br
http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/tagenialis
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
O melhor e-mail gratuito da internet: 6MB de espaço, antivírus, acesso POP3, filtro contra spam.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 16:03:55 -0400 |
|
Salve Caius Minucius Scaevolae
If a proposed law was drafted that outlined when the Consuls could swap
months and we ask those who have held this office for their input this law
could be adopted before the next election and any candidates would know it
terms and the new Consuls could plan accordingly.
Vale
Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Fortuna Favet Fortibus (is this not right?)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Caius Minucius Scaevola" <ben@callahans.org>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: reply re Cohors
> Salve, Tiberius Galerius Paulinus -
>
> On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 11:24:50PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Salve
> >
> > I have a question. I know that the Senior Consul holds the Fasces for
May,
> > but does he have to? If he is going to be absent can't he and the
junior
> > Consul swap months. In the Ancient Republic didn't one Consul remain in
Rome
> > to govern while the other attended to the military campaign of the
moment? I
> > know that both were equally in command on different days but both left
only
> > when Rome was fighting on two fronts.
> >
> > We have a system of twin executives can this not meet the needs of a
absents
> > of one?
>
> That's a fairly good question if considered on a broader scale than that
> of the present moment, actually. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing an
> edict or a law that would grease the wheels of that particular
> mechanism, just in case of future need. However, some relevant questions
> would be:
>
> 1) How long of an absence would be considered sufficient for this
> purpose? What happens if an absence that was planned as short-term (say,
> a day short of whatever the limit happens to be) gets extended by a
> continued (or new) emergency?
>
> 2) What happens if a Consul has emergencies come up for two months in a
> row? Does the other Consul hold the fasces straight through, and is that
> a fair load on him?
>
> Just to bring things back to the present for the moment, I don't believe
> that the Consul's current absence would meet any reasonable definition
> of point 1. But these are, I think, interesting and important questions.
>
>
> Vale,
> Caius Minucius Scaevola
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Audentes fortuna iuvat.
> Fortune favours the brave.
> -- Vergil, "Aenis"
>
>
> 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: reply re Cohors |
| From: |
Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net> |
| Date: |
Mon, 19 May 2003 18:51:08 -0500 (CDT) |
|
Salve Cai Minuci,
> That's a fairly good question if considered on a broader scale than that
> of the present moment, actually. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing an
> edict or a law that would grease the wheels of that particular
> mechanism, just in case of future need. However, some relevant questions
> would be:
It's best to keep the arrangement informal - this provides for
maximum flexibility. The alternation of months is simply a voluntary
arrangement between the Consuls, and either could become "active" if
his colleague was absent or otherwise occupied.
> 2) What happens if a Consul has emergencies come up for two months in a
> row? Does the other Consul hold the fasces straight through, and is that
> a fair load on him?
Both Consuls are always fully empowered, and can act if the other has
no objection. One of them steps back in alternate months merely as
a courtesy to the other.
Vale, Octavius.
--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus,
Censor, Consular, Citizen.
http://konoko.net/~haase/
|
