Talk:Amici dignitatis (Nova Roma)

Duplicate articles

Marcus Octavius Gracchus started Amici Dignitatis (Nova Roma) quite some time ago. Since it is a proper noun it deserves all caps, in my opinion. Would the editors of this article please consolidate as needed under one of the titles and leave a redirect at the other? If you don't know how to do this, ask me for help. Agricola 04:07, 28 August 2007 (CEST)

Done earlier this month. I'd bumped into Octavius' article after commenting Cordus'. I 'ported over the one bit of info that the newer version didn't already have, re-linked the few pages that needed it, and on the 11th I asked him about deleting the older one.

On the name, we'd never considered ourselves a proper faction or other formal grouping. I'd interpreted amici dignitatis as a description, used in the same way as, say, "civil-rights activist". (Doesn't mean I'm right, though...) -- Marius Peregrinus 05:19, 28 August 2007 (CEST)

OK then, unless there is an objection here in the next few days I'll convert the old page to a redirect to this one. I suspected that you had taken care of it, but it is good to have the record of the thinking here. Agricola 04:22, 29 August 2007 (CEST)

About the name

The origin of the name amici dignitatis could be of some interest. It wasn't exactly "Friends of Dignity" the way a modern would interpret the phrase. Rather, it--like the group itself--was a reaction to the perceived attitudes, as much as the actions, of Nova Roma's senior magistrates over the year or so previous. Many of them had rationalized their harrassment of us by claiming it was done in defence of their dignitas, defined by them as their public standing and the measure of respect they felt they were owed.

This concept was a non-starter with us: we held that true dignitas is a thing freely given by a Roman community, a thing to be earned, not something you could demand from others or claim for yourself. As in the early Church, "It was there [Berea, iirc] that they were first called Christians." I don't call myself an Anything. It is said of me that I am Roman. It is said of, say, Pomponius Atticus that he has dignitas. Where we go, whatever we do, people react as if these things were true of us. That is how we know we have it: that we can affect the world the way those with dignitas or auctoritas do. It does not come to us for calling it. It certainly does not come to an office-holder just because he proclaims it as his by right.

So we wanted, first of all, to redeem the much-abused concept of dignitas. It is in this sense that we were the "friends of Dignity". We wanted relationships in NR, and between fellow Romans, to not be so lopsided. We wanted NR put on alert that respect has to be earned; that it was to be treated as an honor, not a perk of office. A just-plain-Civis could have enormous dignitas; a magistrate might not. This was one way to keep the magistrates from getting high-handed, and one way for "Roma Reborn" to be a fulfilling experience for Her rank-and-file. There had to be something for us; it did not seem to us that any non-Senator, non-magistrate had any other voice in those early years.

-- Marius Peregrinus 09:04, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

Ides of March page

I have two articles from The Eagle, vol. IV, no. II (April 2001), dealing with the "Ides of March resignations" and presenting both Germanicus' and Formosanus' perspectives on the event. I'm going to put them on the proposed page, Ides of March resignations (Nova Roma)...but first I'd like to know if that's a good title, or should I put the year in there, or if the community would rather I call it something else. (It's a lot easier to edit the link beforehand than to rename the page afterwards!) <g> -- Marius Peregrinus 20:32, 28 August 2007 (CEST)