Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Subjects: My Endorsements for Offices & Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 16:02:34 -0800

<Snip>

Ave,

Let me state this from the beginning, those parts that I have snipped I
agree with or have no comment with. :)


>
> An underage candidate who wants to become a magistrate is faced with
> a lex that is based on the assumption that she/he is too young for
> the office:
>
> Because at his/her age......
>
> he/she is supposed to be too inexperienced for the office
> she/he is supposed not to have the necessary means for the office
> he/she is supposed not to be dedicated enough for the office
> she/he is supposed not .....(you will find more, if you think hard
> enough)
>
> Looking at this, a very old dispute between two Roman law schools
> (the Sabinians and the Proculians) comes to mind. One of the schools
> was putting emphasis on strict age limits whereas the other wanted to
> look only at the concrete maturity of the person (child) involved.
>

Sulla: Yes, that would be a correct way of looking at it...however, I see
it more traditionally bound, those in favor of following the traditional
ancient Roman model as exemplified by the Lex Villia Annalis and those who
want to deviate from the traditional model of ancient Rome.

>
> Now, our lex took the road of the strict age limits but leaves room
> for citizens already mature enough, although they are too young in
> years.
>
> But those citizens face a steep road to climb. They have to persuade
>
> the people in the election
> 2/3 of the Senate
> and both Censors (of which you could very soon be one!).
>
> If they succeed in doing all of that, they will certainly have proved
> their maturity beyond any doubt and they will be more than worthy to
> assume their offices.
>

Sulla: Very true. If they have gone through the process as stated in the
Lex, I completely agree they have proven their maturity beyond any doubt.

>
> But the lex does not tell the candidate in what order to address
> these obstacles. And now, my dear Lucie Equitie, comes the best part
> for me:
> I believe the spirit of the lex is, that the WAY a candidate
> addresses this obstacle is part of his "maturity test"!
>
> To give you an example:
> It seems that for someone facing me as Censor it might be enough to
> seek approval after the election took place and the people have
> already shown their confidence in him.
>
> Whereas with Censor Sulla he/she should certainly show the kind of
> respect our esteemed Censor expects (i.e. the Senate is more
> important than the people and their vote) and ask the august fathers
> and the Censors well before the election for approval, so not to
> insult them and cause them not to act at all (something the august
> fathers have btw chosen to do so far anyway in the cases of those who
> cared to ask well before these elections!).
>

Sulla: First off, I have never stated the Sentae is more important than the
People and their vote. Both work together, I believe in the mixed
constitution that Nova Roma has, so please do not put words in my mouth, M.
Marcius. Because I support the Constitution and I also support the belief
in following the ancients as much as we possibly can. And, in this
particular instance, I am very much in favor of following the ancients.

>
> Of course, you can hold it against me, that I myself, although rich
> in years, would fail Sulla's maturity test.

Sulla: Such a statement from one who might be my colleague in the
Censorship. I hope that if you are elected M. Marcius you will display at
least some ability to be respectful of your colleague. Since we will have
to work together. I know I shall make the same attempt.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976233780/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] My age (was Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate)
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 19:08:44 EST

Salve,

In that case Happy Birthday, and may you have many more.


Vale
Aeternia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976234172/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Candidate Recommendations
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 18:32:12 -0600 (CST)

Salve Nicolae Moravi,

> There you have it, citizens. I expect hoots of derision from some in response.

Not from here, at least. I salute the nonpartisan nature of your
recommendations.

Vale, Octavius.

---
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976235535/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate]
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:43:50 -0000

You raise good questions, Sura! I'm not sure I have the answers, and I
may not have expressed myself well.

I do know that as a Senator, I want to be sure that age exceptions are
granted when we a) have a good candidate AND b) need that candidate to
fill a spot no suitably aged person is willing to fill.

Does that explain my view a little better? I would welcome proposals
from anyone who could suggest a way to establish this idea in our
policies.

Patricia Cassia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976239832/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:47:24 -0000

> I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know who
> might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate.

I'm 35. Old enough to be President of the United States, a position I
understand is open...

P. Cassia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976240058/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Candidacy for Tribune
From:	gaiusimperius@--------
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 02:26:23 -0000

Salve and Greetings fellow Quirites

I do realize that we have nearly one day of voting behind us however
it is my understanding that today is also the last day to announce
ones candidacy for an office. Consequently I Gaius Imperius a
Queastor of Nova Roma stand in front of you in a white toga candida
in a hope that you will elect me to the office of the tribune of the
plebs.
I promise to perform my duties honestly, honorably and to the best of
my abilities always keeping in mind the interests of the populus I am
to protect.

I hope my candidacy can still be accepted and I can be added to the
electoral lists.

Gaius Imperius
Candidate for Tribune
Quaestor


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976242390/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Traditions or trappings? (was: What are we fighting for?)
From:	"JusticeCMO" <justicecmo@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:32:42 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 2:43 PM
>
> Albeit I concede that the
> AD as such tend to choose for democratic principles as seen in modern
states
> of today (with mostly European examples), it is still Roman. We keep the
> Roman functions, checks and balances, nomenclature, and often make
reference
> to historical examples as well

When that's all you espouse, I naturally have little problem with it.
However, when you take purely modern causes (as expressed by code words such
as "social justice" and "social gender") and attempt to retro-fit them into
the Roman Republic by piling on Roman nomenclature and various other
"trappings", then my problems with the agenda of the Amici Dignitas
signatores grow.

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976242908/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma]
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:34:27 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Apollonius Formosanus [mailto:bvm3@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 3:59 AM
>
> I would here like to talk about the fundamental rights that our
> cives here in Nova Roma should enjoy vis-à-vis their magistrates and
> government. I do not intend here to propose precise texts, but only the
> general classes of provisions that I think should be taken into
> consideration.
>
> 1. We need a guarantee that all crimes will be judged, and any
> punishments levied before a court, whether a Praetor or a Comitia, not
> by any other authority.

Hmmm... like the Senate, perhaps? And what was the only time in recent
memory that happened? Someone, help me out here?

> 2. We need a guarantee of criminal trials being before the People in
> Comitia not only in cases of potential exile (capital crimes), but in
> all in which a magistrate is involved in an alleged crime in his
> official capacity, in all when loss of civic rights or disabilites are a
> possible result, and in all for which a citizen feels he would be more
> justly or mercifully treated by the sovereign People than by a Praetor
> acting alone.

You mean like we already have in paragraph II.B.V. of the Constitution?

> 3. We need a guarantee that any citizen denied admission or readmission
> to citizenship in Nova Roma have a right of Appeal to the People, unless
> he or she has been previously exiled or denied admission by a vote of
> the People and the term of exile (if one was set) has not yet expired.
> The Censors must be required to inform such persons of this right in a
> clear and adequate way at the time of denying an application.

Has anyone been denied admission or readmission lately? Are there hordes of
people at our gates, straining to get in save for the capricious whim of the
Censors? If not, I wonder why you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't
exist. Surely we have enough _real_ work to do...

> 4. We need a right of appeal to the Praetors and Tribunes for anyone
> moderated or suspended from the list by the Curator Sermonis, if such
> person feels it unjust. The right of free speech is extremely important.
> Tribunes should be exempt from all interference from the Curatrix as a
> part of their sacrosanctity as representatives of the People’s Libertas.

Nonsense. Even a Tribune shouldn't be allowed to spam the official email
list with irrelevant or abusive postings. You're right; the right of free
speech is extremely important, and shouldn't be allowed to be drowned out by
a single magistrate with a grudge. Indeed, the right of free speech is so
important that it too is included in our Constitution (paragraph II.B.4.).
But as with all such rights, it is not, and cannot be absolute, especially
on State-sponsored fora, where a certain level of "order and civility" can
be expected, in order for all to enjoy its fruits; not just those with the
fastest keyboards and most virulent rhetoric.

> 5. We need a guarantee of freedom of association in private
> organisations comprised of Nova Romans or a mixture of Nova Romans and
> others, including their right to use the Nova Roman Main List for
> non-commercial announcements, just as in any free society. They may be
> required to avoid the word „Sodalitas" in their names unless they intend
> within ninety days of their founding to apply to the Senate for
> official registration as Sodalitates of Nova Roma. They might also be
> strictly required not to give the impression of representing the Nova
> Roman State officially unless they are given some specific commission to
> do so by a competent magistrate, the Senate or the People.

I'm not sure this is necessary. After all, if the official organizations of
Nova Roma are defined, doesn't that make everything else either unofficial
or not connected with NR at all?

> 6. We need a stronger and clearer affirmation of the provisions in the
> Constitution against sexual discrimination. This should include the
> right of all citizens to officially use a Nova Roman name having a
> gender they individually deem most appropriate for the7m, and an
> acceptance of their sexual identity or changes therein as stated on
> oath or solemn legal affirmation.

Here we go again. This has been hashed and rehashed so often, I will refrain
from doing so here. But suffice to say you, Piscinus, and Vado are just
about the only ones banging this particular drum any more.

> 7. We need a clarification that chatrooms and lists not established by
> Nova Roma or its Sodalitates are not Nova Roman jurisdiction from the
> standpoint of regulating the conduct there of persons who happen to be
> Nova Roman citizens.

Why does this need to be clarified? Because folks like you with a
pathological fear of any sort of authority (real or imagined) don't feel
secure knowing you can't verbally abuse someone on an email list without
possibly being told to be more civil?

> Other legislation against libel and slander - if
> well-written and not favouring those in power - will also protect us in
> other ways.

So are you saying that those in power, such as you aspire to be, should not
be protected against libel and slander?

> *However*, Quirites, be on your guard. The Amici Dignitatis
> since even before we were formed has worked to popularise the idea of a
> well-ordered judiciary and rule by law. Even those who had had these
> ideas previously were restimulated to come out with them again.

Indeed, and restimulated by what, I wonder? What specific cause is behind
this whole movement of yours? We're _all_ in favor of a well-ordered
judiciary and rule of law. It seems, though, that some seem to want to have
the will of the vocal minority trump the law, and _that_ many of us oppose.

> Some others probably
> have conceptions more akin to establishing their idea of *order* and
> *controlling* citizens mroe strictly through laws and courts more than
> protecting their rights and dignity.

Indeed. As in controlling their actions as magistrates and individuals,
making sure that any sentiments that aren't in keeping with certain points
of view are immediately squashed because they're not Politically Correct
enough? How DARE a magistrate exercise his RIGHT under the Constitution and
issue a ruling on a subject? Doesn't he realize he's so wrong? So very, very
wrong!?

Would you be in favor of guaranteeing the rights of, say, Sulla, as
vigorously and completely as you seem to be guaranteeing those of Maria
Fimbria? I think we all know what _sort_ of speech you want to protect, and
that any speech that disagrees with it will somehow be "less equal".

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976243015/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma]
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:37:43 -0500

Salvete;

> If, therefore, you agree with me that we consider the protection
> and respect for the rights and human dignitas of every Nova Roman the
> first priority in building a decent and secure Nova Roma, I personally
> implore you to give your votes to the candidates for each office who
> have signed the Statements of the Amici Dignitatis. They are all each
> and every one deeply committed to this cause. Enough to risk their
> political careers in Nova Roma by standing up and taking an initiative
> for these things. Please think about it.

So here we have again the party-which-is-not-really-a-party. Which is it,
and how long will it be before your comrades once again distance themselves
from you? Parties have platforms; you have the Amici Dignitas statement.
Parties run together as a bloc; you've just cemented that bloc together, by
calling for people to vote based on the party platform. You even have a
name. I realize that it has been unpopular to admit before now, but everyone
knows the truth even if your comrades won't admit it. You are a party, or
faction, or bloc.

Your party platform is quite well done, actually. Indeed, if taken at face
value, the Amici Dignitas statement is quite innoccuous. When I first read
it, it seemed harmless enough, and even something I could put my own name
to. Who could be against greater civic participation, or communication?

But then I began to read between the lines. And read the posts of those who
composed and signed it. There is only one issue that has sparked this sudden
interest in "dignitas", "human rights", "oppression", and "social justice".
What could this issue be? This mysterious issue which has caused almost all
of the signatores of the Amici Dignitas statement such anguish? Why, the
Gender Edictum, of course. Both Piscinus and Vado have made it a central
theme in the past; the justification of their sudden interest in "fighting
the power". And of course we all know where Formasanus stands on the
issue...

Indeed; the Amici Dignitas statement is so mild, so flat, that one wonders
what was in the mysterious "first version" that was so inflammatory that the
very email list it was on was deleted to prevent the archives from being
accessed. Did the views of the authors change, or just their perceptions of
how it would damage their political futures? After all, nobody is likely to
let in the firebrand if you can see the torch in their fist...

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976243208/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Traditions or trappings? (was: What are we fighting for?)
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:38:56 -0500

Salvete;

My apologies. That should have been sent from my email account, not my
wife's.

Valete;

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JusticeCMO [mailto:justicecmo@--------]
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 9:33 PM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: RE: [novaroma] Traditions or trappings? (was: What are we
> fighting for?)
>
>
> Salvete;
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 2:43 PM
> >
> > Albeit I concede that the
> > AD as such tend to choose for democratic principles as seen in modern
> states
> > of today (with mostly European examples), it is still Roman. We keep the
> > Roman functions, checks and balances, nomenclature, and often make
> reference
> > to historical examples as well
>
> When that's all you espouse, I naturally have little problem with it.
> However, when you take purely modern causes (as expressed by code
> words such
> as "social justice" and "social gender") and attempt to retro-fit
> them into
> the Roman Republic by piling on Roman nomenclature and various other
> "trappings", then my problems with the agenda of the Amici Dignitas
> signatores grow.
>
> Valete,
>
> Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
> Candidate for Consul
>
> http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus
>
>
>
>
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976243280/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Traditions or trappings? (was: What are we fighting for?)
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:56:54 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 2:43 PM
>
> Also, I do believe that taxes aren't very reconstructionist
> either, but a rather modern concept. As has been pointed out in this forum
> before, ancient Rome usually did not impose any taxes.

If it's been pointed out here before, it was done so incorrectly. Indeed,
was it not Cicero who said "taxes are the sinews of the state"?

In the Republic, income was derived from two principal sources, the
vectigalia and tributum. The Vectigalia was essentially rents collected from
private cives using public land and/or facilities; mines, commons, etc. In
Nova Roma, we haven't yet officially enacted this, but it does exist in the
arrangements various members of the Ordo Equester have made with the State
for use of the Macellum. In the future, as Nova Roma's resources grow, I
hope such use-fees will expand as we are able both to provide more services
to our people and derive more income from them.

The Tributum was much closer to what most modern-day people think of as a
"tax". It came in two forms. It came either in the form of a stipendium (a
head-tax, paid by each individual, similar to the proposal that was recently
defeated) or a decuma (tithe) of 1/10th of the grain harvest or 1/5th of the
fruit harvest.

So, my young Draco, there is indeed ancient precident for taxing Cives to
fill the State coffers. Don't always believe what your Pater tells you...

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976244362/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] re: chat
From:	Kyrene Ariadne <kyrene@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 19:16:40 -0800 (PST)

Salve Cassius,

I tried to reach your chat but the server wouldn't let me sign in... wouldn't
even let me sign up a new account for the server. Gave me a 500 internal error
every time I tried :(


Maybe next time. I think it's an excellent idea and would love to chat with
you sometime. I can also be reached via Yahoo, AIM, or ICQ via the s/ns in my
signature.



Vale,

Andrea Gladia Kyrinia


=====
* Kyrene Ariadne/Andrea Gladia Kyrinia *
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Hellenion: http://pagan.drak.net/hellenion *
* The Tholos: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/1527 *
* ICQ:6663573 Yahoo:KyreneAriadne AIM:Kyrene Ariadne *

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976245403/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Double Voting?
From:	gmvick32@--------
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 03:22:16 -0000

Salve,

As a Rogator, I thought I'd throw in a suggestion.

It's at our discretion to decide on a case by case basis how to treat
a duplicate vote.

If you think you've accidentally voted twice, and you know the two
numbers of the votes (a message should display giving you the vote
number), email the numbers with an explanation to
rogatores@--------

PLEASE only send email to the rogatores if you seriously think you
sent a duplicate vote such as Aurelia Sertoria described. :)


Livia Cornelia Aurelia




--- In novaroma@--------, "Quintus Sertorius"
<quintus-sertorius@--------> wrote:
> My name is Aurelia Sertoria and I have a problem. I was showing my
father-in-law how to vote by revisiting the Cista and after filling
out my choices for a second time for his benefit, I pressed the submit
bottom and I voted for a second time! I even got another confirmation
number! My question is, did I vote twice, or did I not, and, by doing
this did I spoil my vote?
>
> Thank You
>
> Aurelia Sertoria
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976245745/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	gmvick32@--------
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 03:44:02 -0000

Forget the recounts! I demand a re-election so I can write in
Patricia Cassia for President of the United States!

Livia Cornelia Aurelia


--- In novaroma@--------, "pjane@j... " <pjane@j...> wrote:
> > I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know
who
> > might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum
Aetate.
>
> I'm 35. Old enough to be President of the United States, a position
I
> understand is open...
>
> P. Cassia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976247044/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"L. Tiberius Sardonicus" <sardonicus_@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:02:28 -0500

Salvete,

I am a candidate for Quaestor and I passed the minimum age requirement 17
years ago...today, as a matter of fact :)

Valete,
L. Tiberius Sardonicus


_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976247444/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Singing for Fortunatus
From:	<gmvick32@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 20:57:29 -0700

Salvete, Omnes.

Well, you wouldn't really want me to sing. But happy
birthday, Fortunatus, 32's been good to me so far this year.

Livia Cornelia Aurelia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976247492/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Singing for Fortunatus
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 20:02:00 -0800

Wow all of our citizens are older than me...I am just 28 years old. I cant
wait til I am in my 30's! :) Well all I can hope for is that I learn alot
between now and then.....And, maybe the older I get the less confrontational
I will be too. :) At least one can hope. :)

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor

gmvick32@-------- wrote:

> Salvete, Omnes.
>
> Well, you wouldn't really want me to sing. But happy
> birthday, Fortunatus, 32's been good to me so far this year.
>
> Livia Cornelia Aurelia
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976248132/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Singing for Fortunatus
From:	SyanneRose@--------
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:20:27 EST

Now, now. Not everyone is older than you, remember you are older than me!




Vale
Aeternia

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976249249/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Piparskegg UllRsson <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2000 22:25:11 -0600

Salutamus!

L. Tiberius Sardonicus wrote:

> Salvete,
>
> I am a candidate for Quaestor and I passed the minimum age requirement 17
> years ago...today, as a matter of fact :)
>
> Valete,
> L. Tiberius Sardonicus

Bona Dies Natalis!

Salus et Fortuna.

--
===========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Coves, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
Quæstor, Dominus Sodalis
My homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
Nova Roma website
http://www.novaroma.org/main.html
Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
http://www.egroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976252057/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] New Provinica Administration
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:41:09 -0600

7 Dec 2000

Salve All

As my position as Praetor dose not officially begin until January 1 2001, I will therefore not post my Oath of Office until shortly after that time. I will then also post the necessary edicta to begin the Official Provincal Nova Roma Administration of Canada Occidentalis! Between now and that time we, as a Provincia, will continue to internally organize.

Vale

Quintus Sertorius
Future Praetor
Canada Occidentalis


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


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976254885/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	amcgrath@--------
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 06:39:16 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, "L. Cornelius Sulla" <alexious@e...>
wrote:
> Ave,
>
> As 1/2 of the Censorship, let me state my personal opinion.
> It is my belief, that an applicant would need to get the exemption
>prior to his
> announcment of candidacy.

Salvete,

I back Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix's interpretation of the law. An
underage person wishing to become a candidate for a position
regulated by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate should first
approach the censors to ask for their approval for the exemption.
After it is received, the prospective candidate would then approach
the Senate with the censor's approval in hand. This would, of course,
carry a great deal of weight. If the censors did not grant their
approval, then no further action would be taken. There would be no
senate vote. This is the exact procedure I had in mind when writing
the law.
However, the wording of the law ("assume the office") does I
suppose leave it open for one to seek approval even after being
elected to the office. While this would be consistent with the letter
of the law, this dishonest approach would flout the spirit of the law
and I for one would not vote to approve such an exemption. I chose
the word "assume" rather than "stand, run or assume" to leave a small
window open for people who might be underage as candidates but who
would reach their birthday before actually assuming office. (it would
seem unfair to me for someone whose birthday might be at the end of
December) I admit that I did not forsee the dishonest tactic
mentioned by some people--run for office, get elected then say, "Oh,
by the way I'm underage, grant me an exemption, please." An
additional clause or more specific wording on that point would have
clarified this issue. Forgive my lack of foresight in not
anticipating this situation.
As for the necessity of the law, we had to start somewhere in
codifying the cursus honorum and establishing guidleines of who could
hold office. It was a first step that seemed more equitable than
requiring so early in our history that one serve in a lower office
before moving to the next one. That would have limited us to a
handful of people who would have even been eligible to run for higher
office.

Valete,

Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus,
Senator, Consularis


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976257559/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Egroups announcement
From:	Lucius Cornelius Sulla <alexious@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:11:10 -0800

eGroups-Moderator-News@-------- wrote:

> There is 1 message in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
> 1. Important eGroups Moderator News
> From: newsletter-admin@--------
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 03:37:30 -0000
> From: newsletter-admin@--------
> Subject: Important eGroups Moderator News
>
> Dear eGroups Moderator,
>
> We have exciting news to share with you. We want you to be among the
> first to know that eGroups and Yahoo! Clubs will be merging. The new
> service will be called Yahoo! Groups.
>
> WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH EGROUPS?
>
> eGroups will now be called Yahoo! Groups. Don't worry, all eGroups
> email and web addresses will continue to work, all data and event
> ownership will be maintained, and your entire group membership will
> carry over.
>
> Everything you love about eGroups will still be around. Yahoo! Groups
> will continue to be a free service, and all the main features you use
> now will continue to be a part of the new Groups service. We'll begin
> to internationalize Yahoo! Groups after we've launched the service in
> the United States. In the interim, you will be able to use the
> international versions of eGroups.
>
> WHAT'S NEW?
>
> Yahoo! Groups will have lots of new features and even better
> customization. Upon launch, you will be able to:
>
> * Chat with other group members using our improved Yahoo! Chat.
> * Add a splash of color to your group, or a main page photo, all
> without knowing HTML.
> * See when group members are online and communicate with group members
> in real time using Yahoo! Messenger.
> * Reach a larger audience. You will have the entire Yahoo! Network at
> your doorstep.
>
> And much, much more to come! The best part -- you won't have to do
> anything to your group to get it converted. This will all happen
> automatically. All you have to do to access this wide array of web
> functionality is merge your current eGroups account with a Yahoo! ID.
> For a detailed FAQ on this and other merger topics, please visit:
>
> http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/info
>
> On behalf of everyone here at Yahoo Groups, thanks for being a
> moderator on our service.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> The Yahoo! Groups team
>
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to
> egroups-moderator-news@--------
>
> To remove yourself from further mailings, just reply to this message.
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976268675/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] The age question
From:	"Caius Flavius Diocletianus" <3s@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:29:30 +0100

Salvete, Quirites.

It seems to be trendy to tell one´s age. So, here´s my age: 31 years. Not to
old for any office, I hope ;-).

Valete
Caius Flavius Diocletianus
Candidate for Praetor Urbanus
www.diocletian.de/elect/diocletianus/



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976275069/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Philosophical question
From:	dougies@--------
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 12:09:42 -0000

Ave quirites et pater conscripti,

I have a personal philosophical beleif, and I wanted to hear your
opinions on it. I felt we could all do with a very small detour into
another realm for a while ;-). Here it is:

'Immortality is a true unattainable. The only form of immortality that
can be acheived is to leave behind a name for ourselves.'

I'd like to hear your ideas and thoughts on this. I know it might seem
weird, but hey...aren't we all a tiny bit tired of arguements etc.

Valete bene,

Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976277386/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia De Magistratum Aetate
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:34:46 +0100

Salve, Scipio

> Having observed some of the debate about this Lex, and of some of
> the arguments presented, I'd like to make a few observations (and
> please keep in mind, these are my opinions only):
>
> - The reason for establishing such a law is the expectancy that
> someone may have developed a corpus of experience in dealing with a
> wide variety of situations by a specific age. The increases in the
> age
> limits reflect the idea that these positions require more experience
> -
> not that we need to keep them out of the hands of our younger
> members.
> While age is not perhaps the ideal indicator of the level of
> experience or ability of a person, it is an objective indicator

> wrinkles or lack thereof cannot be explained by words!)
>
> - The Lex does exist; if we are to continue the experiment that is
> Nova Roma, then we must abide by the conditions by which we began it.
> If this Lex should be changed (and for the sake of argument, let us
> say it should), then it should be changed by the methods we have
> established in our Constitution. If we are just to set aside our laws
> whenever we feel like it, why would we have laws?

I agree with you. The law should be changed from within, and not just be set
aside. However, 2/3 Senate majority vote is quite hard to obtain, I'm
afraid, so that's giving a citizen an exemption rather than setting the law
aside.

> - This having been said: I have no doubts whatsoever about the
> abilities and enthusiasm of Sextus Appollonius Draco. My only
> recommendation to him - and by the way, to us all, is that we may
> disagree on given subjects without inciting hatred or dissension
> between us. We have enough strife in our respective macronations -
> let
> us leave it there.

Thank'ee, mi Scipio!

> - One last thing - limiting participation by time as a cives of
> Nova
> Roma may not be the best approach. Some people "lurk" for several
> weeks, and even months, before they decide to commit to being a
> cives.
> Sometimes, these "newcomers" may actually be a little better informed
> than their fellows about the issues of our Res Publica. I think it
> would be better to have everyone that wants to help do so - and those
> who are ineligible for election be appointed as Scribes, Legati, etc.
> so that their good energy does not go to waste. Instead of spending
> time arguing and trading insults, it would be better to think about
> how we can contribute to improving our Res Publica.

My feelings exactly. As you said it, there's been too much citizen-bashing
here in the pursuit of egoistical motives. I believe that the Latin word
"civitas" stood for "community", which they felt was very important. Of
course they had their own bunch of egoists as well (don't we all ;-)), but
generally, one of the reasons of success of the Roman Empire was that they
were good at working together, especially in the religious field
(disregarding the unfortunate misbehaviour towards jews, druids and
christians). An Imperium that big could have never existed without
coordination and cooperation. This still applies today.

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976279617/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:24:19 +0100

Salvete, and sorry if I'm boring you people to death with my daily flood of
postings!


Palladius scripsit:
> I back Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix's interpretation of the law. An
> underage person wishing to become a candidate for a position
> regulated by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate should first
> approach the censors to ask for their approval for the exemption.
> After it is received, the prospective candidate would then approach
> the Senate with the censor's approval in hand. This would, of course,
> carry a great deal of weight. If the censors did not grant their
> approval, then no further action would be taken. There would be no
> senate vote. This is the exact procedure I had in mind when writing
> the law.
> However, the wording of the law ("assume the office") does I
> suppose leave it open for one to seek approval even after being
> elected to the office. While this would be consistent with the letter
> of the law, this dishonest approach would flout the spirit of the law
> and I for one would not vote to approve such an exemption. I chose
> the word "assume" rather than "stand, run or assume" to leave a small
> window open for people who might be underage as candidates but who
> would reach their birthday before actually assuming office. (it would
> seem unfair to me for someone whose birthday might be at the end of
> December) I admit that I did not forsee the dishonest tactic
> mentioned by some people--run for office, get elected then say, "Oh,
> by the way I'm underage, grant me an exemption, please." An
> additional clause or more specific wording on that point would have
> clarified this issue. Forgive my lack of foresight in not
> anticipating this situation. <snip>

May I assume that you are the author of that very lex, right? Well, I'm
personally opposed to granting exemption beforehand, because there are a few
problems and objections...
1. Will the Senate have enough time to debate over it?
2. Do the Senatores know the given individual?
3. If an applicant keeps waiting and the candidacy declaration period passes
without a verdict from the Senate, that would be a pity, I think.
4. The Censores are nowhere mentioned in these law, and are both Senatores
themselves - why draw them into this anyway?

If an individual that is underage didn't convince the populace to vote for
him/her, then the Senate wouldn't even have to debate on granting an
exemption. Thus, much work would be saved if the Senate granted the
exemption after the elections, I think.

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976279629/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Shall it never be good enough?
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:15:16 +0100

Salve,

> > If, therefore, you agree with me that we consider the protection
> > and respect for the rights and human dignitas of every Nova Roman the
> > first priority in building a decent and secure Nova Roma, I personally
> > implore you to give your votes to the candidates for each office who
> > have signed the Statements of the Amici Dignitatis. They are all each
> > and every one deeply committed to this cause. Enough to risk their
> > political careers in Nova Roma by standing up and taking an initiative
> > for these things. Please think about it.
>
> So here we have again the party-which-is-not-really-a-party. Which is it,
> and how long will it be before your comrades once again distance
themselves
> from you? Parties have platforms; you have the Amici Dignitas statement.
> Parties run together as a bloc; you've just cemented that bloc together,
by
> calling for people to vote based on the party platform. You even have a
> name. I realize that it has been unpopular to admit before now, but
everyone
> knows the truth even if your comrades won't admit it. You are a party, or
> faction, or bloc.

Imagine we had said we were a party. You might have cried as one the first
"conspiratio"! No, we aren't a party. We share the same ethics, and are
sponsors of active citizen participation in Nova Roma. On all the rest we
may agree and disagree as much as we want. I don't know if you seek to
divide us in a Formosanus, and a non-Formosanus side, but if you do, then I
think it's not really working. Is it such a shame to disagree with your own
friends? I think not.

> Your party platform is quite well done, actually. Indeed, if taken at face
> value, the Amici Dignitas statement is quite innoccuous. When I first read
> it, it seemed harmless enough, and even something I could put my own name
> to. Who could be against greater civic participation, or communication?
>
> But then I began to read between the lines. And read the posts of those
who
> composed and signed it. There is only one issue that has sparked this
sudden
> interest in "dignitas", "human rights", "oppression", and "social
justice".
> What could this issue be? This mysterious issue which has caused almost
all
> of the signatores of the Amici Dignitas statement such anguish? Why, the
> Gender Edictum, of course. Both Piscinus and Vado have made it a central
> theme in the past; the justification of their sudden interest in "fighting
> the power". And of course we all know where Formasanus stands on the
> issue...

What are you reading between the lines? That's an interpretation you are
offering, an assertion. By the way, I much regret the focus on the Gender
Edictum. There was another, much disputed Edictum as well, namely that of
the Returning Cives. And a third cause was the Reprimand. These have been
rehashed enough, and not to anyone's good because nothing came out if it -
but I fear that you can't see that the central point is not about the Edicta
in se. The question is: how did these things come to be? And why? The system
allowed it, and the system is yet young. So why not enhance it? Do you
honestly think we should wait for three or four more things to go around
here until we could ring five alarm bells? One Edictum or thousand don't
make a difference. If something happens once, it will happen again, unless
the circumstances (= system) change. Mind you, I'm not talking about radical
reformations here, but a constructive striving for mutual understanding,
more participation and more safeguards.

> Indeed; the Amici Dignitas statement is so mild, so flat, that one wonders
> what was in the mysterious "first version" that was so inflammatory that
the
> very email list it was on was deleted to prevent the archives from being
> accessed. Did the views of the authors change, or just their perceptions
of
> how it would damage their political futures? After all, nobody is likely
to
> let in the firebrand if you can see the torch in their fist...

The first statement was deleted because we didn't like it ourselves, after a
discussion with neutral people we invited to take a look at it before the
release. You may believe it or not, but we can change our opinions on
things. The reason why that was totally deleted was because it would have
absolutely no relevance anymore to the next version, not because we have
dirty little secrets, as you seem to be portraying it.

Vale bene,
Sextus Apollonius Draco


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976279625/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Traditions and trappings (combined answers)
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:45:53 +0100

Salve,

FIRST TOPIC

> > > Albeit I concede that the
> > > AD as such tend to choose for democratic principles as seen in modern
> > states
> > > of today (with mostly European examples), it is still Roman. We keep
the
> > > Roman functions, checks and balances, nomenclature, and often make
> > reference
> > > to historical examples as well
> >
> > When that's all you espouse, I naturally have little problem with it.
> > However, when you take purely modern causes (as expressed by code
> > words such
> > as "social justice" and "social gender") and attempt to retro-fit
> > them into
> > the Roman Republic by piling on Roman nomenclature and various other
> > "trappings", then my problems with the agenda of the Amici Dignitas
> > signatores grow.

The problem is, as has been pointed out here before, that this is a state of
the 21st century, and we cannot ignore problems of our own era. We don't own
any land yet, but think of it: once we own it, we will have environmental
issues. Will you be ignoring those, simply because they are "modern" issues?
Nova Roma is a modern, reconstructionist state, in my humble opinion. But I
suppose I gave bad examples, too. Everything should remain as Roman as
possible, but always in regard of things that do or do not apply to a modern
nation that wishes to pose itself as a better dream than a macronation.

SECOND TOPIC

> > Also, I do believe that taxes aren't very reconstructionist
> > either, but a rather modern concept. As has been pointed out in this
forum
> > before, ancient Rome usually did not impose any taxes.
>
> If it's been pointed out here before, it was done so incorrectly. Indeed,
> was it not Cicero who said "taxes are the sinews of the state"?
>
> In the Republic, income was derived from two principal sources, the
> vectigalia and tributum. The Vectigalia was essentially rents collected
from
> private cives using public land and/or facilities; mines, commons, etc. In
> Nova Roma, we haven't yet officially enacted this, but it does exist in
the
> arrangements various members of the Ordo Equester have made with the State
> for use of the Macellum. In the future, as Nova Roma's resources grow, I
> hope such use-fees will expand as we are able both to provide more
services
> to our people and derive more income from them.
>
> The Tributum was much closer to what most modern-day people think of as a
> "tax". It came in two forms. It came either in the form of a stipendium (a
> head-tax, paid by each individual, similar to the proposal that was
recently
> defeated) or a decuma (tithe) of 1/10th of the grain harvest or 1/5th of
the
> fruit harvest.

I was indeed mistaken; you are correct. Your co-candidate Cassius pointed
similar things out to me in private, too.

> So, my young Draco, there is indeed ancient precident for taxing Cives to
> fill the State coffers. Don't always believe what your Pater tells you...

Why do so you insist on my age? Err. Anyway, I could be that some of you
assume that I am actually nothing but a victim (or even a puppet) of my
paterfamilias, but I can assure you that that is far from true. I have my
own resources, my own life, and my own opinions. I'm sceptic towards anyone
and everyone, and the gods may grant me that I will always remain this way.
I am young, but not indoctrinated, thank you very much :-D.

Vale,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976279699/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Oh, Gods, I'm actually going to post on GENDER
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 12:53:20 -0000

Draco wrote, and Germanicus replied:

> > 6. We need a stronger and clearer affirmation of the provisions in the
> > Constitution against sexual discrimination. This should include the
> > right of all citizens to officially use a Nova Roman name having a
> > gender they individually deem most appropriate for the7m, and an
> > acceptance of their sexual identity or changes therein as stated on
> > oath or solemn legal affirmation.
>
> Here we go again. This has been hashed and rehashed so often, I will refrain
> from doing so here. But suffice to say you, Piscinus, and Vado are just
> about the only ones banging this particular drum any more.

Well, yes and no.

Nova Roma's approach has always been to adopt the practices and customs
of ancient Rome, except when they are clearly unworkable in modern
society. The most frequently cited examples of such adaptation to the
modern world are the role of women (who can vote and hold office in
Nova Roma, as they could not in Roma Antiqua) and the slave system
(vital to Roma Antiqua, universally regarded as abhorrent now).

Another is sexual preference, which is up to the individual in Nova
Roma. In ancient Rome, homosexuality was the subject of complex
subterfuges and official condemnation.

The question of allowing a person to choose his or her gender (not
biological sex, but the choice of presenting oneself to the world as
male or female) is another such issue. Many, including, Piscinus, Vado,
Draco and myself, believe this is an area where we need to allow
greater freedom than was (presumably) offered in ancient Rome. However,
many others, including Germanicus, do not believe this.

Both of these beliefs are strong and rooted in the individuals' own
moral codes and perception of the world. I think it's important to
recognize that this isn't about one person or incident. The reason this
is an issue in Nova Roma is because this larger issue, how to deal with
transgendered individuals, is still being debated in Western societies.

The current situation is a compromise. Like most compromises, it
satisfies no one.

I fully respect the right of anyone to believe differently from me on
this issue, and expect that continuing Nova Roma discussions on this
issue will reveal deep divisions. My point is that many who are not
"banging the drum" may share the beliefs expressed. It's important for
us not to let this division deflect us from working together toward
Nova Roma's goals.

Patricia Cassia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976280009/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oh, Gods, I'm actually going to post on GENDER
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:54:42 +0100

Salve Patricia,

> Draco wrote, and Germanicus replied:

I did *****NOT***** write this. It was my pater, Formosanus, who did. Sorry,
had to clarify! <snip>

Vale,
Draco


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976280229/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:01:04 EST

Salvete

I am puzzled about the concept of a law here.

We propose a law, debate its merits, vote on it, pass it. Then a year or
two later we discuss it further to decide whether we should follow it?

As long as it remains law, we should follow it. If it were flawed (which,
mea sententia, it is not) we should propose its repeal and vote on it.

I think that in Roma Antiqua laws were not normally treated as optional
according to the mood of the day.

Valete,

Lucius Sergius Australicus Obstinatus
Tribunus Plebis
Candidate for Praetor


certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976280470/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:01:03 EST

Happy birthday and bona fortuna, Tiberius.

LSAO

On 12/7/00 1:02 PM L. Tiberius Sardonicus (sardonicus_@--------) wrote:

>Salvete,
>
>I am a candidate for Quaestor and I passed the minimum age requirement 17
>years ago...today, as a matter of fact :)
>
>Valete,
>L. Tiberius Sardonicus
>


certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976280469/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate - Australicus' age
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:01:02 EST

Salvete whoever-needs-to-know

Lucius Sergius Australicus Obstinatus has tallied 55 years and 10 months
in his present personage.

Valete,

L. Sergius Aust. Obst.
Tribunus Plebis
Candidate for Praetor


On 12/7/00 12:00 PM labienus@-------- (labienus@--------) wrote:

>Salvete
>
>C Aelius accidentally sent this to me alone, and has asked me to forward it
>along to the list.
>
>Valete
>Fortunatus
>_______________________
>
>Salvete Quirites.
>
>I request that all candidates state their age so that we may know who
>might be under the age required by the Lex Iunia de Magistratum
>Aetate.
>
>I make this request on my own, but I'm sure the rest of the citizenry,
>as well as the Senators, would like to know this information. The
>Senators especially will need this information since we will have to
>take some action regarding said law and any dispensations.
>
>Valete.
>C. Aelius Ericius.
>Senator. Pontifex. Augur. Paterfamilias Gens Aelia.
>


certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976280471/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Egroups announcement
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:11:34 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucius Cornelius Sulla [mailto:alexious@--------]
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 4:11 AM
> >
> > * Chat with other group members using our improved Yahoo! Chat.
> >
> > * See when group members are online and communicate with group members
> > in real time using Yahoo! Messenger.

These features might be just the thing for those folks who're having trouble
accessing the chat room. Anyone have any experience with these features in
Yahoo groups?

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976281001/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The age question
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 06:55:58 -0600

8 Dec 2000

Salve All

I am jumping on the band wagon, I Quintus Sertorius am 38 years old.... I
now feel old looking at others ages!

Vale

QS

> It seems to be trendy to tell one´s age. So, here´s my age: 31 years. Not
to
> old for any office, I hope ;-).Caius Flavius Diocletianus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976281010/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Oh, Gods, I'm actually going to post on GENDER
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:18:14 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: S. Apollonius Draco [mailto:hendrik.meuleman@--------]
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 7:55 AM
>
> I did *****NOT***** write this. It was my pater, Formosanus, who
> did. Sorry, had to clarify! <snip>

An understandable mix-up, as I'm sure most will agree. Who can usually tell
the difference? ;-)

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976281401/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Singing for Fortunatus
From:	Matt Haase <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 07:22:42 -0600 (CST)

Salve Luci Corneli,

> Wow all of our citizens are older than me...I am just 28 years old.

Not all... I also am 28.

Vale, Octavius.

--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976281764/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Senate Voting Results - another correction
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 08:54:01 EST

Salvete quirites!

Some commments by Senator D. Iunius Palladius on Item Nine, which were
located at the bottom of his email, were inadvertently omitted from this
post. At his request they are now included with his vote.

COMPLETE Results of Voting on the November Senate Agenda
Proxies for A. Gryllus Graecus and M. Iunius were cast by L. Cornelius
Sulla
Proxies for M. Iucundia Flavia were cast by Q. Fabius Maximus

Item the First.
Reimbursement procedure for Magistrates of Nova Roma
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: No
A. Gryllus Graecis: No
M. Iunius: No
C. Aelius Ericius: No.
M. Cassius Julianus: NO. * The proposed procedure is an excellent start,
but was done in a hurry since there was a "crisis" over Censorial
funding. That has been dealt with in the short term, so there seems to be
time for everyone who has ideas to present them. This can be worked out
and completed next vote.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas (yes).
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS. We have to start somewhere on
this, and most of the proposal is perfectly sensible
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)! (I agree with my Colleague Senator
Germanicus that, in my view, to pass a flawed Consultum is far worse than
to wait for a reasonable time to get it right. There is a saying which
applies: "We never have the luxury to get it right the first time, but
always have sufficent resource to correct it!!!" )
C. Tullius Cicero: Negat, this has not been sufficiently discussed.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO Good in principle, but I cannot
support it as it stands. It needs much more careful, unhurried work,
especially on detailed procedure for claiming, assessing claims,
reimbursement, and audit. I strongly suggest we co-opt a committee, from
citizens with professional experience, and including the Quaestores, for
encoding such procedures as proposed law. Project funding - in fact, the
whole issue of project management - needs a whole manual, not just part
of one Senatus Consultum.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Negat. This procedure was rewritten twice from varius
submissions. It still needs some tweaking. Suggest it is polished and
resubmitted for Dec. Call.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS I agree with Cassia. We have to start
somewhere. If we keep changing the text, it will never get done.
M. Marcius Rex: NEGAT More time for discussion needed
T. Labienus Fortunatus: NEGAT There is much of value in this proposal,
but the quaestores' role is incorrect.
D. Iunius Palladius: Iunius Palladius votes no
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Antiquo (Negat/NO)
M. Octavius Germanicus: NEGAT. While a procedure is needed, this one has
the Quaestors choosing whether to approve an expense, which is not proper.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: NEGAT There seem to be both structural and
grammatical errors with this proposal.
YES 3; NO 15; AB 0
ITEM 1 FAILS

Item the Second
It is proposed that Nova Roma enact the following policy on financial
controls
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS. Same points apply
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, there should be a permanent treasury staff.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO For reasons similar to those stated
above, I cannot give this my approval.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: Negat More time for discussion needed
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius abstains. I think that we should start
moving control of the
treasury towards a more permanent, professional staff.
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 15; NO 2; AB 1;
ITEM 2 PASSES

Item the Third
Legio V Alaudae (The Larks) request Nova Roma Sponsorship
Shall we sponsor the Legio?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES. * I also am not overly concerned over having
too many small legions. Sponsoring new startups only gives us an
opportunity to grow Legions which are more connected to Nova Roma, and
made up with a greater percentage of Citizens.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. (While some have expressed concerns about
sponsoring too many small legions, I think this is exactly the purpose of
our sponsorship program - to give these legions a place to find one
another and arrange projects in cooperation.)
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, this is part of our goals.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES Though I feel we should not go on to
sponsor an infinity of legiones, as I said earlier, I wish them well.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas. Although we should start thinking of
requesting greater numbers of recruits in legiones before we grant them
sponsorship. Alaudae has a special place in my heart, since it was one
of the first legiones I constructed.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS I had originally suggested the
sponsorship program way back when, and am quite pleased that it is being
continued.
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;
ITEM 3 PASSES

Item the Fourth.
Incorporation of Switzerland into Province Germania.
Shall we do this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes. * If there is later any objection from Italian,
French or Romany Swiss, we can adjust borders and/or name at that time.
I assume it will be considered the Regio of Helvitia.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas, though I wish we had been able to hear from
more actual
Helvetian Citizens before making this choice.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: ABSTINEO.
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, I don't see the combination as a problem.
N. Moravius Vado: ABSTINEO/NO VOTE/ABSTAIN Although no French- or
Italian-speaking citizens have objected (I admit I do not know whether
there are any to object), there may be objections in future. Also, as
there is no one in this House to speak for the particular interests of
the cives of Gallia or Italia, I feel unable to support this motion. And
could we give the regio a more Roman name, like Helvetia, please?
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas This will set the record straight.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS Though what about all the French speaking
citizens? When I was there I thought they made up a third of the
population. Do they really want to be part of Germania?
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS. Yes, but if a French or
Italian-speaking citizen of Helvetica prefers to be considered part of
Gallia or Italia, I hope the censors would allow that.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS We are merely formally confirming
the status quo.
YES 16; NO O; AB 2;
ITEM 4 PASSES

Item the Fifth,
Certification of the Sodalitus Musarum as a Nova Roman Sodalitus.
Shall we do this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. May the Gods inspire them.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES This Sodalis will, divis volentibus,
enrich our cultural Romanitas and especially the Religio Romana.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;
ITEM 5 PASSES

Item the Sixth
Quintus Sertorius has asked to be considered for appointment as
Propraetor of Canada Occidentalis.
Shall he be appointed?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes. * [Much cheering, fanfares and flower petals!]
M. Cassius Julianus: At last! I vote an enthusiastic YES, and am
gratified that his patience held out long enough to see this done.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. He has shown himself to be enthusiastic,
dedicated and energetic on behalf of Nova Roma.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, Sertorious is perfect for the position.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES He is a man of proven diligence,
enthusiasm, diligence and ability.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS. He has worked hard for this, and will
make an excellent praetor.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; N0 0; AB 0;
ITEM 6 PASSES

Item the Seventh
The Praetor of Germania has requested that Senate might approve the
opening
of the Limes Cooperation between the Provinces.
Shall we approve this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES. (And am in agreement that we should be
more proactive and work toward starting such efforts ourselves.)
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Abstaino. I am not clear on this issue.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES The sharing and emulation of best
practice, and mutual assistance, deserves approval. The Limes
Co-operation facilitates this. I speak from experience.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS. Standards are a good thing.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 17; NO 0; AB 1;
ITEM 7 PASSES

Item the Eighth.
Additional Internal Senate Procedures.
A. The Senate shall conduct its business within full view of the
Citizenry. This will be implemented by allowing all Citizens to read
(but not post on) the Senate e-mail list. Exceptions are provided.
Shall we allow this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: No
A. Gryllus Graecis: No
M. Iunius: No
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: NO
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. It is my understanding that in ancient Rome,
Senate discussions could be heard by (and were regularly discussed by)
Citizens while they were going on. It is also consistent with the idea of
helping Citizens of Nova Roma to feel more involved and to
contribute their knowledge and ideas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: NEGAT. I am persuaded by the arguments of
Australicus on this point.
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)! (I do not believe, in my view, that any
useful information can be gained by the Citizens of Nova Roma from
hearing deliberations on the Senate Floor, and I am likewise absolutely
certain that much harm and confusion would result from such a proposal.
Finally it does not appear to be historically correct. I honor Senator
Fortunatus for his abiliy to look past the immediate discussion, and
pledge to him my support in the future toward keeping the Citizens of
Nova Roma properly informed.)
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, I am satisfied with the restrictions.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO As I have said before, if it proves
unworkable, it will be hard to revoke or amend. I would, however, support
any future proposal to allow individual citizens read-only access on
application (especially magistrates and other officials), for a limited
period and to a limited number at any time.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Negat. I have already made my reasons known. If the
Republic didn't do it, why should we? The Senators conducted business
out doors, until they had to debate topics. Then they went inside.
There had to be a reason for this. I think I was so they wouldn't be
intimidated by the populace.
M. Iucundia Flavia: NEGAT It was not done in old Rome. We are
attempting to recreate the Roman republic.
M. Marcius Rex: Negat I bow to Sergius Australicus for his
constitutional law opinion on this particular proposal.
T. Labienus Fortunatus: NEGAT I have, no doubt, surprised many with this
vote. I came into this debate much in favor of the idea, though I had
some slight qualms about the technicalities of its execution. I remain
torn between a desire to provide a transparent government and a wish to
maintain the mos maiorum. I have long argued that one of the major
questions facing Nova Roma is how much to keep of the old versus how much
to add of the new. It is not a question that will be answered quickly or
easily.
Additionally, the major reason that I originally felt that this body's
deliberations should be open to the populace is because of the tendency
to use senatus consulta to decide issues that should be taken before the
comitia. Often, we treat our decisions as though they create law, and we
have occasionally acted as though we have a right to discipline
individual citizens--effectively acting as a closed court in which the
accused is not even assured of being allowed to defend him or her self.
If we take onto ourselves the powers of the comitia, then we must be
exposed to scrutiny and answerable to the people for our decisions.
However, I am heartened by the fact that almost every candidate for major
office has made building the institutions necessary to rectify the
problem of the Senate's arrogation of powers that are not its by right
the center of his or her campaign. Therefore, in light of those campaing
promises, and in an optimistic spirit, I opt to maintain the mos maiorum.
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes no
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Antiquo (Negat/NO)
M. Octavius Germanicus: NEGAT. I refer once again to the line from Twain
(or Bismarck) about sausage-making.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: NEGAT I am guessing, based on on the votes of
some of my colleagues, that we are to vote individually for each half of
this item. If I am mistaken in this
assumption, then my vote for the combined 8th item is NEGAT. (May I
suggest that in the future such items be split into two for clarity's
sake?)
YES 3; NEGAT 15; AB 0;
ITEM 8A FAILS

B. II. The votes of individual Senators, along with any rationales they
offer with their votes (i.e., in the same e-mail as the vote itself),
will be made available to the Citizens by the Tribunes of the Plebs,
either by forwarding them to the main Nova Roma e-mail list or by
posting them to the Nova Roma web site.
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES, and suggest that there should be a
record of Senate votes posted to the website. No Senator should be
*forced* to explain their vote, but an option for such should definitely
be included.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS.
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES This House as an institution, and many
of its members as individuals, have suffered from an undeservedly
negative perception by the populus. I trust this will go a long way to
remedying the matter.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas. This has always been allowed. Lists were
often put up on the sides of the Rosta so those that could read could
inspect them.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS. Although the process itself should be
conducted in privacy, the people do have a right to know who supports
which items. Even though we are appointed for life, many of us run for
elected office as well, and should therefore be held accountable.
I also believe this to be historically correct, as the Tribunes (and
door-slaves) did inform the people what happened within the Curia.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS As long as this doesn't turn into
the "thin edge of the wedge", I don't see any harm in it. I haven't been
able to find anything that speaks of Senate votes being a secret ballot.
YES 17; NO 1; AB 0;
ITEM 8B PASSES

Item the Ninth.
Change to the Electoral Procedure Re: Multiple Candidates
To ensure a consistent standard for future elections,
these two mutually exclusive proposals are now placed before
the Senate:
VOTE FOR BOTH or ABSTAIN.
A. "One Vote"
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: No.
M. Cassius Julianus: A. One vote. Octavius has made an excellent case
for this.
Patricia Cassia: A. One vote. I am persuaded by Octavius' arguments on
behalf of historical accuracy.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS. I am persuaded here by the
argument for consistency with Roma Antiqua and by the immediate
practicalities. I do think, however, that it is unfortunate that we have
attempted to have a full number of Centuries with a small number of
citizens. This rather destroys the point of the Century system,
irrespective of the silly results of treating a century as "tied" when
one citizen votes.
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Negat. If there is more than one selection there must
be more than one vote to reflect the opinion of the citizen.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO People have a right to vote for as
many candidacies as there are posts to be filled. Votes will be spoiled
as a result of misunderstandings. This will be contentious. Ancient
practice is not always best practice.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas. We do have to come up with a better system
eventually.
M. Iucundia Flavia: NEGAT This is not a full vote. It is half a vote.
Why should the citizens stand for that?
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes **NO** on this item, which should
more properly be
called the "half a vote per voter proposal."
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS. This fixes a flaw in our system in a
historically correct way. Each person selects *one* candidate for consul
or praetor, just as our ancestors did. A beneficial effect of this is
that both competing viewpoints will be represented in the Consulate, and
the consuls will serve as controls on each others power -- as the
founders of the Republic intended.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS My arguments in favor of this
option have already been presented.
YES 13; NO 5; AB 0;
ITEM 9A PASSES

B. "Multiple Votes, Ties Awarded to All"
L. Cornelius Sulla: No
A. Gryllus Graecis: No
M. Iunius: No
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: NEGAT, for the reasons above
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, as above.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES It has been said that this system would
favour political parties. There are no political parties in NR. May the
gods spare us that! It has been said that this system gives people more
than one vote for each candidate. Mea sententia, it is better to give the
voters more votes than they ought to have, rather than deny them the
votes they ought to have.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Negat. Too many potental problems though I liked the
effort.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS What problems? People get to vote for who
they want. Isn't this what it is all about?
M. Marcius Rex: NEGAT
T. Labienus Fortunatus: NEGAT A very good try, M Octavius.
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes YES To allow only one vote for
multiple offices disenfranchises the individual voter. When one votes for
consul, one is voting for *2* *separate* offices, not one. It has nothing
to do with parties or teams running, it has to do with fairness and the
voter having a complete say. To do otherwise makes a *joke* of our voting
process. It gives the voter half a vote. While half a vote is better than
none, it is still *half* a vote. Flavius Vedius' argument about the
possible danger of political parties, while somewhat compelling, is
hardly convincing in this context and only addresses a *possible* danger.
It is a side issue. It does not address the central issue which is
allowing the voter to have a complete--not half as this would do--say
over the makeup of the government. It allows one to only vote for half
the offices open.
Perhaps it is historical, I have not researched this thoroughly. That is
the strongest--perhaps the only--argument among the pro-half-a-vote
proponents (let's call a spade a spade. The proposal is misnamed being
called "one vote only" but should instead be called "half a vote
only.")but it is not sufficient in light of the damage done to the voter.
In this I would follow the example of real modern nations, which we
aspire to be sometime in the distant future. This proposal would
carelessly toss half the voting power of each individual away.
Senators, I urge you to vote NO on 9a and YES on item 9b. To do otherwise
is to vote against the individual voter of Nova Roma. If you have already
voted yes on 9a and no on item 9b, I strongly urge you to reconsider and
rescind your vote and recast it. This proposal has been tossed about for
2 years and rejected for good reasons. Reject it again.
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Absto (abstain)
M. Octavius Germanicus: NEGAT. It seemed like a good idea at first,
mathematically and logically sound, but it is not historically correct,
it also encourages factionalism by allowing an entire "party" to be voted
in, and it changes the balance of power by allowing some votes to be
counted twice.
YES 5; NO 10; AB 3;
ITEM 9B FAILS

Item the tenth
Addition of a Third Rogator.
To include a third elected or appointed Rogator, with only two needed to
oversee the electoral process.
The third to act as backup
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes*My comments on this proposal is that it should
be taking to the Comitia and the Lex Vedia amended. Otherwise according
to the Legal precedence
section in the Constitution, this Senatus Consulta means very little.
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius says: It would help the Republic to function if we
had a couple
of spares for this highly essential post. We should so recommend this to
the Comitia.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES. I also agree with Germanicus that there
should actually be *four* trained Rogators at any time as opposed to
three.
Patricia Cassia: Assuming this is actually a recommendation to the
Comitia rather than an attempt to overturn a Lex (which we can't do), Uti
rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS - provided that this is to be
understood as a recommendation for legislation, not as an
unconstitutional attempt to amend a lex by s.c.
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)! (The item is not worded properly to be
voted upon by this August Body. A change in the proper Lex should be
submitted for approval and then
voted upon by the people. Again, in my view, a flawed Consultum is worse
than no decision at all.)
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES
If the Senate is entitled to co-opt a Dictator in an emergency, it would
seem absurd for the Senate not to take ythe initiative to co-opt back-up
Rogatores (I would favour two), when the machinery of government is in
danger of breaking down. Consul Q. Fabius has every right to feel
exasperated. So do I. A general agreement to bend the rules of the
Constitution in cases such as those we have experienced this year, when
the Comitia cannot work and elections cannot be held is, I believe, fully
pardonable when a shortcoming in the Constitution has us backed into a
Catch-22 situation.
It is the spirit of the law, not the letter of it, which is important at
times like these. So I am voting for something that is unconstitutional
and therefore (technically) illegal. I hope it is the last time I shall
feel I need to do such a thing. I hope this passes the vote, and goes to
the Comitia for ratification (assuming we have enough Rogatores to allow
this to happen).
Q. Fabius Maximus: I say yes it should be done and sent to the Comitia
for ratification.
The Consules will write a lex and put it to the people next week.
M. Iucundia Flavia: NEGAT It is unconstitutional as written.
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS I concur with Senator Labienus on this issue
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS I agree to this only inasmuch as we
shall secure a replacement for either of the two elected rogatores in
anticipation of the eventuality that one of them may prematurely lay down
the task. We do not have the power to alter a lex, and I urge the
consules to draft an appropriate lex and put it before the people during
the upcoming election.
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes NO
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Antiquo (Negat/No) As Germanicus pointed out this
is not something we can do, but I do think this should be something that
is on the first comtia call.
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS. I am aware that the lex specifies two
Rogators; therefore the third must be strictly considered a backup, who
will assume the position when one of the primaries fails to fulfill their
duty.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: NEGAT The Senate lacks the legal authority to
alter a Lex. The item, as presented, is unconstitutional in my opinion.
If it does pass, I would urge the Tribunes to exercise their power of
intercessio in such cases. (I would absolutely support a Senatus
Consultum that urges the Lex be amended by the Assembly...)
YES 13; NO 5; AB 0;
ITEM 10 PASSES LEX TO BE SENT TO THE COMITIA

Item the eleventh
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo requests to be Propraetor of Canada Orientalis.
Shall we allow her?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES. Pompeia Cornelia Strabo has proven
herself to be both dedicated and enthusiastic. I believe Nova Roma will
benefit greatly by having her in this office.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. Pompeia Cornelia is a thoughtful and mature
person who will represent us well.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, Cornelia is well suited to the position. I
am pleased to see both Canadian positions will be filled for the first
time.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES She is as worthy of the office as Q.
Sertorius is of that of Propraetor Canadae Occidentalis, for the same
reasons.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Vti Rogas. Though is it my imagination or are most of
the Cornelii
Provincial Praetors?
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;
ITEM 11 PASSES

Item the Twelfth.
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus requests the creation of a province called
Argentina and requests the Provincial Praetorship.
Shall we create the Province?
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES, although I agree that the province
should be called Argentinia.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas (though I am with Germanicus in wishing it
were called Argentinia).
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES Although I think it is more a matter of
the Senate approving what has already been created.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;
ITEM 12a PASSES

Shall we make him the Provincial Praetor?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;
ITEM 12b PASSES

Senator A. Probus cast the following votes too late to count:
Alexander Probus:
Item I - No
Item II -Yes
Item III - Yes
Item IIII - Yes
Item V - Yes
Item VI - Yes
Item VII - Yes
Item VIII - A - No
- B - Yes
Item VIIII - A - Yes
- B - No
Item X - Yes
Item XI - Yes
Item XII - Yes (with an additional note)
According to the last item I would like to post a question. What if few
years after we will have other citizens in Chile, Uruguai, Paraguai and
Bolivia? Will we create separate provinces for every national country or
will try to simpliify the things uniting some of them into one NR
province.
My opinion is to createa province with a different name than one national
state in the regio. That name may to be acceptable for the potential
citizens from all the national states in the regio. On the other hand
Argentina is a very big country so she could be a separate province. I
would
like to hear opinions on that issue of colleagues more experienced with
the
situation of America Australis.

Valete,

Lucius Sergius Australicus Obstinatus
Tribunus Plebis



certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse.

(You know, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.)


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976283648/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] My age (was Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate)
From:	"Marcos Boehme" <m_arminius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 11:03:20 -0300

Salvete

I have 29 years, until Ianuarius

Marcus Arminius Maior


Great Gift Idea! FREE cell phone, internet ready at Lycos Marketplace
http://www.inphonic.lycos.com/redirect.asp?referringpage=www.lycosd1

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976284212/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Candidate's Page Unveiled
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 15:41:35 +0100

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.!
As Candidatus Praetorius (Candidate for Praetor), I am pleased to
announce that my Candidate's Page is now available (thanks to the
public-spiritedness of another candidtate of the Amici Dignitatus, C.
Flavius Diocletianus) at
http://www.diocletian.de/elect/formosanus/http://www.diocletian.de/ele
ct/form osanus/
Here you can see my picture, basic platform statement,
qualifications, autobiographical information, and Vision for Nova
Roma, which I also reprint below in this post. This information is
rather more detailed and complete than has been inflicted on everyone
on this list thus far, and the autobiography is completely new.
If you follow the link from the bottom of my page to:
www.diocletian.de/elect/http://www.diocletian.de/elect/
you can also conveniently view the pages of several other candidates
who have signed the Amici Dignitatis Statement, so it really is a
domain worth a visit in order to decide how you wish to cast your
vote.
I, by the way, am 51 years of age, and so presumably sufficiently
experienced in life to satisfy anyone, as well as the law of Nova
Roma on that score.
Visio Novae Romae (Vision of Nova Roma)
My vision of Nova Roma is of a place where citizenship brings access
to a trans-(macro)national world order based on the best of Ancient
Rome's classical humanism and love of libertas and iustitia confirmed
by law. A place where the citizens will be far more active in
legislating for themselves than is now the case. A place where the
protections of law, tribunate and provocatio (appeal to the People)
will defend the rights of every civis from any arbitrariness of
individual magistrates. A place where one can learn and use Latin,
study and practice the Religio Romana, and find advice and references
for any problem related to Roman civilisation. A place that may
eventually offer the equivalent of university-level courses in all
things Roman, and serve as a world centre for the coördination of
Roman studies. A place where Romanitas at its best comes alive again.

Quitites, I ask for your help in building a Nova Roma like that in
which we can all dwell.
Vivat Nova Roma Libera et Iusta!
Valete!
Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS PRAETORIVS >>
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius              
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
________________________________________
Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi. (Seneca)
(Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al Racio)
________________________________________


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976286722/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Candidate's Page Unveiled
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 15:44:15 +0100

M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.!
As Candidatus Praetorius (Candidate for Praetor), I am pleased to
announce that my Candidate's Page is now available (thanks to the
public-spiritedness of another candidtate of the Amici Dignitatus, C.
Flavius Diocletianus) at
http://www.diocletian.de/elect/formosanus/http://www.diocletian.de/ele
ct/form osanus/
Here you can see my picture, basic platform statement,
qualifications, autobiographical information, and Vision for Nova
Roma, which I also reprint below in this post. This information is
rather more detailed and complete than has been inflicted on everyone
on this list thus far, and the autobiography is completely new.
If you follow the link from the bottom of my page to:
www.diocletian.de/elect/http://www.diocletian.de/elect/
you can also conveniently view the pages of several other candidates
who have signed the Amici Dignitatis Statement, so it really is a
domain worth a visit in order to decide how you wish to cast your
vote.
I, by the way, am 51 years of age, and so presumably sufficiently
experienced in life to satisfy anyone, as well as the law of Nova
Roma on that score.
Visio Novae Romae (Vision of Nova Roma)
My vision of Nova Roma is of a place where citizenship brings access
to a trans-(macro)national world order based on the best of Ancient
Rome's classical humanism and love of libertas and iustitia confirmed
by law. A place where the citizens will be far more active in
legislating for themselves than is now the case. A place where the
protections of law, tribunate and provocatio (appeal to the People)
will defend the rights of every civis from any arbitrariness of
individual magistrates. A place where one can learn and use Latin,
study and practice the Religio Romana, and find advice and references
for any problem related to Roman civilisation. A place that may
eventually offer the equivalent of university-level courses in all
things Roman, and serve as a world centre for the coördination of
Roman studies. A place where Romanitas at its best comes alive again.

Quitites, I ask for your help in building a Nova Roma like that in
which we can all dwell.
Vivat Nova Roma Libera et Iusta!
Valete!
Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS PRAETORIVS >>
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius              
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
________________________________________
Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi. (Seneca)
(Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al Racio)
________________________________________


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976286806/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Philosophical question
From:	Piparskegg UllRsson <catamount_grange@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 09:22:38 -0600

Ave Gaius Sentius,

dougies@-------- wrote:

> Ave quirites et pater conscripti,
>
> I have a personal philosophical beleif, and I wanted to hear your
> opinions on it. I felt we could all do with a very small detour into
> another realm for a while ;-). Here it is:
>
> 'Immortality is a true unattainable. The only form of immortality that
> can be acheived is to leave behind a name for ourselves.'
>
> I'd like to hear your ideas and thoughts on this. I know it might seem
> weird, but hey...aren't we all a tiny bit tired of arguements etc.
>
> Valete bene,
>
> Gaius Sentius Bruttius Sura


"Cattle die, Kinsman die, you yourself, soon will die,
but bright, fair fame, and an honored name,
will live forever more." - from the Eddaic poem "Havamal"

How often have we heard "Don't do anything to hurt the Family Name!" ?

The many references over the years to the Oriental concept of keeping
"Face."

Name, reputation, fame, glory and so forth. All very important concepts
to our cultural ancestors, north, south, east and east.

Not a strange concept at all.

But, in mine own Religio Septentrionalis, it could be thought of as
weird, or Wyrd, if you will. Wyrd is, in simplest form, the concept
that our deeds build up layers in the Well of Wyrd (located at the base
of Yggdrasil, the World Tree, which connects the Nine Worlds). What we
do in the present (That Which Is Becoming) contributes to an ever
growing past (That Which Has Become), and the future (That Which May
Become) doesn't exist, save for those few things which are obligated to
become by the weight of their Wyrd: The sun rises because the earth was
set spinning, one will die because one was born, the continents will
move because the pressure generated by the inner fires of earth and so
forth.

So, one's Wyrd is shaped by deeds, Right and Wrong. Inaction adds
nothing to our personal Wyrd. This can be summed up, we are our deeds.
The greater the deeds, the greater the remembrance.

In closing, I'd like to offer this from one of the Sagas. In answer to
one of his men asking him why he was undertaking a dangerous voyage from
whence he might not return, the warrior replies "Fyrir Lof!" - "For
Praise!"

I think that being highly regarded in the eyes of others is a basic
human need; to be praiseworthy in a big way, to Make A Name For
Ourselves, your philosophical point is not unusual at all.

===========================================
In Amicus sub Fidelis, Benedicte Omnes!
- Piperbarbus Ullerius Venator
Coves, Paterfamilias Gens Ulleria
Quæstor, Dominus Sodalis
My homestead
http://www.geocities.com/piparskegg/index.html
Nova Roma website
http://www.novaroma.org/main.html
Sodalis pro Coqueror et Coquus
http://www.egroups.com/group/Sodalis_Coq_et_Coq


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976288969/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Lex Iunia de Magistratum Aetate
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:22:35 -0600 (CST)

Salve Deci Iuni,

> However, the wording of the law ("assume the office") does I
> suppose leave it open for one to seek approval even after being
> elected to the office. While this would be consistent with the letter
> of the law, this dishonest approach would flout the spirit of the law

I do not see either of the two current underage candidates as
having acted dishonestly. They have been, as you have said, consistent
with the letter of the law. It was only after they declared candidacy,
both admitting their ages, that this discussion arose, and it was
said that they should seek approval first. They should not be held
to a requirement that was not made known at the time.

> I admit that I did not forsee the dishonest tactic
> mentioned by some people--run for office, get elected then say, "Oh,
> by the way I'm underage, grant me an exemption, please."

Marcus Scribonius and Sextus Apollonius both made it clear that they
were young at the time they declared candidacy. There is absoultely
nothing dishonest about what they have done.

> As for the necessity of the law, we had to start somewhere in
> codifying the cursus honorum and establishing guidleines of who could
> hold office.

It is a good law. It allows for exceptions to be made to allow
extraordinarily dedicated and hard-working youth to serve.

I do not believe the granting of such exceptions should be automatic,
a mere rubber-stamp by the Censors and Senate. I certainly would
vote against almost any teenager becoming Tribune or Praetor -- that's
too much power and too much opportunity to create mischief.

Rogator and Plebeian Aedile, however, are different. Neither of these
positions allow one to issue edicts on non-trivial issues, or to
assemble the Comitia, or to veto any senior magistrates. They are
purely administrative functions - important and necessary, but
without power.

The position of Rogator is tedious and receives little recognition or
thanks; it also has the unfortunate side-effect of prohibiting its
holder from running for any other office while still Rogator. We've
had difficulty keeping these positions filled in the past, so much
so that the Senate recently approved the idea of a third, backup
Rogator. Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus has asked for the
position three times and been turned down twice. He is dedicated
enough, and willing enough to contribute his time to Nova Roma,
that I believe we should not turn him away again. I voted for him
for Rogator, and I will vote YES if this issue comes to the Senate.

Similarly, Plebeian Aedile is an office that has been relatively
unpopular and difficult to keep filled. We have only a single
Plebeian Aedile right now (there should be two), and I have not seen
much activity from that office, nor from my colleague, the junior
Curule Aedile. It seems that the four Aedile positions have mainly
been occupied by title-collectors (with notable exceptions such as
Quintus Fabius and Marcus Martianus). Sextus Apollonius Draco, on the
other hand, has worked hard to contribute to mailing list administration,
to Sodalitates, and to his provincial administration. He even has
an impressive agenda of tasks he intends to do as Aedile. With
the election of Sextus Apollonius a certainty due to a lack of
candidates, I will vote to approve his assumption of that office.

Valete, Octavius.


---
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976288968/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Gender and names
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 16:47:42 -0000

My sincere apologies to both Formosanus and Draco for mixing them up.
I am rather discouraged to think that no one looked beyond my mistake
to read what I wrote, and I made myself late for work for nothing...

P. Cassia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976294069/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Philosophical question
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 10:54:36 -0600

T Labienus C Sentio Omnibusque S P D

> 'Immortality is a true unattainable. The only form of immortality that
> can be acheived is to leave behind a name for ourselves.'

Personally, I would have stopped with the first sentence, though there's
nothing weird about the sentiment. It is one that is widely held, due
to the fact that our primary experience of great men and women is
through the stories and writings that are passed along from the time of
their existence to us.

However, take a look at what it is that we know of them. We know some
of what they wrote, and some of the opinions others had about them. We
also know what has been written about their writings, and what has been
written about the things that were written about them. But we do not
know them.

And, eventually, even those things will cease to exist. Some day,
nobody will remember who Cicero or Plato were, even through third-,
fourth-, or any-hand accounts. Ask the average man on the street who
Camillus was, and he will most likely stare at you blankly. All things,
even reputations, eventually end.

I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said--"Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desart.... Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."

Ozymandias, Shelley

Valete

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976294448/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Gender and names
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 11:01:43 -0600

Salve Cassia

> My sincere apologies to both Formosanus and Draco for mixing them up.
> I am rather discouraged to think that no one looked beyond my mistake
> to read what I wrote, and I made myself late for work for nothing...

I usually try to refrain from "me too" posts. I read what you wrote and
agreed with it completely.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976294915/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Oh, Gods, I'm actually going to post on GENDER
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 18:13:33 +0100

Salve,

> >
> > I did *****NOT***** write this. It was my pater, Formosanus, who
> > did. Sorry, had to clarify! <snip>
>
> An understandable mix-up, as I'm sure most will agree. Who can usually
tell
> the difference? ;-)

Hehe.... lol.

Vale,
Draco


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976295915/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] RE: Candidate's Page Unveiled-updated URL
From:	Oppius Flaccus <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:31:06 -0800 (PST)

Salvete,

The original URL was concatenated in the original
post.
Actual URL is:

http://www.diocletian.de/elect/formosanus/

Valete,
Oppius Flaccus Severus


--- "M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@--------> wrote:
>
> M. Apollonius Formosanus omnibus Quiritibus S.P.D.!
> As Candidatus Praetorius (Candidate for Praetor), I
> am pleased to
> announce that my Candidate's Page is now available
> (thanks to the
> public-spiritedness of another candidtate of the
> Amici Dignitatus, C.
> Flavius Diocletianus) at
>
http://www.diocletian.de/elect/formosanus/http://www.diocletian.de/ele
> ct/form osanus/
> Here you can see my picture, basic platform
> statement,
> qualifications, autobiographical information, and
> Vision for Nova
> Roma, which I also reprint below in this post. This
> information is
> rather more detailed and complete than has been
> inflicted on everyone
> on this list thus far, and the autobiography is
> completely new.
> If you follow the link from the bottom of my page
> to:
>
www.diocletian.de/elect/http://www.diocletian.de/elect/
> you can also conveniently view the pages of several
> other candidates
> who have signed the Amici Dignitatis Statement, so
> it really is a
> domain worth a visit in order to decide how you wish
> to cast your
> vote.
> I, by the way, am 51 years of age, and so presumably
> sufficiently
> experienced in life to satisfy anyone, as well as
> the law of Nova
> Roma on that score.
> Visio Novae Romae (Vision of Nova Roma)
> My vision of Nova Roma is of a place where
> citizenship brings access
> to a trans-(macro)national world order based on the
> best of Ancient
> Rome's classical humanism and love of libertas and
> iustitia confirmed
> by law. A place where the citizens will be far more
> active in
> legislating for themselves than is now the case. A
> place where the
> protections of law, tribunate and provocatio (appeal
> to the People)
> will defend the rights of every civis from any
> arbitrariness of
> individual magistrates. A place where one can learn
> and use Latin,
> study and practice the Religio Romana, and find
> advice and references
> for any problem related to Roman civilisation. A
> place that may
> eventually offer the equivalent of university-level
> courses in all
> things Roman, and serve as a world centre for the
> coördination of
> Roman studies. A place where Romanitas at its best
> comes alive again.
>
> Quitites, I ask for your help in building a Nova
> Roma like that in
> which we can all dwell.
> Vivat Nova Roma Libera et Iusta!
> Valete!
> Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS
> PRAETORIVS >>
> Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae
> (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
> Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis;
> Scriba Censorius              
> ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN:
> Formosanus
> Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
> The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
> Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
> ________________________________________
> Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi.
> (Seneca)
> (Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al
> Racio)
> ________________________________________
>
>



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976296676/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Pro Draco
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:34:33

Omnibus salutem

Germanicus asked Draco to substantiate his statement that gender definition
was a matter of personal choice in ancient Rome. Draco might have replied by
asking Germanicus to substantiate his assertion that it wasn't. But instead,
Draco replied that his old classics teacher at school had said so, and that
he assumed that such a man would not have made it up.

I'd like to know, myself. Certainly it was true in the case of Elagabalus
(Cassius Dio, Historia Romana, 80.16.2-6) (quoted in Monserrat, D.: "Reading
Gender in the Roman World", Essay 6 of "Experiencing Rome: Culture, Identity
and Power in the Roman Empire", Huskinson, J. (Ed.), Routledge, 2000).
Elagabalus' is the first record of a person seeking clinical transgendering,
by the way, though I must say I'm far from happy to have him on our side).
Dio cites this, and Elagabalus' occasionally expressed preference to be
known as a woman, as evidence of the emperor's general depravity, true -but
we aren't (I hope) making moral judgements on gender preference, or on
people who express such preference, but simply discussing ancient precedent
and modern interpretation.

In the above essay, Monserrat goes on to say (pp. 156-7) that gender in
ancient Rome was NOT based on biological sex (this is the modern construct,
as Scaevola Magister has already pointed out), but was generally a mutable
social construct based far more on the individual's current position and
role in Roman society, and on traditionally-assigned values of what
constitutes social and behavioural 'manliness' (being able to give orders,
make decisions, having the power to do unto others, etc.) or 'womanliness'
(having to take orders, being subordinate, generally passive rather than
active).

I said all this months ago during the You Know What. I advanced sources
ancient and modern to support my argument, as again I do now. At the time,
no-one advanced any sources substantiating the opposite argument (i.e., that
Romans regarded biological sex and social gender as one and the same thing,
and as an inflexible, absolute state).

Now I challenge those who think ancient Rome was an antecedent of modern
'conservative' thought in this respect. Can you offer some evidence?

Valete

Vado
Liberal Intellectual.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976297214/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Sticking my nose in once again (was re: [novaroma] Philosophical question)
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 18:24:40 +0100

Salvete,

Well, actually this should have been an issue for the philosophy list!
(www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy). But anyway.

Venator, this Wyrd you mean... it seems similar to karma or kamma to me. Is
it similar? I know quite a lot about Buddhism, but don't know much about
paganism (other than the polytheistic Religio Romana).

As far as immortality goes, I think everything is immortal, in a sense. The
substance of which I am composed will never cease to exist. However, I would
object to the immortality of fame. Not all famous names survive history.
Will we still know in a millennium who Iulius Caesar was? I wonder. But his
atoms are still out there, perhaps now being a nice bed of flowers in an
Italian park, who knows ;-).

Valete,
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976297518/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Age Declaration
From:	jmath669642reng@--------
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:45:17 -0500 (EST)

Salvete, Citizens;

For all those who have an interest, my age is 64, in years. My age,
however, in my view of the world is somewhere around 30 to 40. My age
when having fun is close to 25. My age when making uncomfortable,
undesirable or unwelcome decisons is 150!!

At the Saturnalia Festival (or under the Yule Tree as you prefer), when
presents are to be recieved, my patient lady-wife informs me that I
resemble an 11 year old with shining eyes!!

In my deliberations as Consul, my full 64 years comes to the fore, BUT,
I try very hard to remember what my feelngs, desires, and hopes were for
the future when I was 17. I also try to remember those things that I
was sure that I could do better than my seniors at that age, which in
the fullness of time, I was very glad to have been relieved of in
responsibility.

At the supper table, I have the appetite and the food preferences of a
21 year-old (and the stomach for it--Tamales, Fried Eggs and Chili con
Carne with Pinto Beans for breakfast --Yummmm!!), and when sitting at
the head of my local Zoning Board Of Appeals Commission, as Charman, I
try to maintain a dignified but relaxed and sometimes amused 40 years of
age. When on holiday with my lady-wife, I try to maintain a humorous
and fun-filled 35 (but am finding it harder and harder to maintain, as
the years go by--Grin!!).

In my Civil War / Rev War Reenactments I portray a very dedicated, stern
and militaristic 40 years of age.

In answering unwanted telephone solicitations I am a rageful and
indignant 85, and in recieving polite communication I am my normal
(hopefully) polite and appreciative 64.

With my historical tool-collecting friends, I am an eager and humble 25,
looking for old tools and the detailed information needeed from my
seniors. Standing on the deck of a fast-moving ship, I am my old 21
again, looking to see what is just over the horizon, and exulting at the
sea spray in my face, and the wind in my hair!!!

My age, then my friends, does not represent necessarily my actions, nor
my view except as modified by my situation. Such I have told my young
friend Draco, and others of a younger age. I have seen that which the
young can accomplish when under competant and supportive direction, and
what they can produce in the hopes of impressing appreciated and
concerned adults. I have also seen what they are capable of when these
young people do not have direction. Finally, I have been a victim of
those who are well within the age limits of Nova Roma for thier elected
and appointed positions, but have chosen to both abuse and ridicule
thier own positions and themselves by thier actions, words and
attitudes, whether they are aware of thier foolish appearance or not.
And finally those young people who are mature well past their years,
have done wonders in my view as fellow workers and those noted outside
my personal endeavors. Unfortunately, in this situation and society,
age is, outside of demonstration of ability, one of the few nomenclators
of maturity, and decisiveness, albiet often an inaccurate one.

In a room full of citizens, the following questions can be asked with
equal expectation of result:

---All here who are honest, truthful and hard-working raise your
hands!!!

---All here who are mature and decisive, beyond thier years, raise your
hands!!!

Now, those of you who must decide the question whatever it is; choose
from the raised hands, those who are, and those who are not!!!!!!!!!

It is my hope that this communication has not confused anyone, and to
that end, I provide the date of my birth---October 13th, 1936 (Yes
Draco, my young friend, this date was considerably after the demise of
the Dinasaur Age--Grin!!!!!!!)

Valete, Respectfully;
Marcus Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!


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


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976297520/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Gender and names
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 18:37:38 +0100

Salve Patricia,

I did read what you wrote, and I agreed. But sending messages rond to
everyone on the list saying "I agree" would even be adding more to the pile
of mail I am producing for NR here each day ;).

Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976297525/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Party Politics
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:45:27

Salvete Quirites

Sic Fl. Vedius Germanicus:

>Parties have platforms; you have the Amici Dignitas statement.
>Parties run together as a bloc; you've just cemented that bloc >together,
>by calling for people to vote based on the party platform. >You even have a
>name. I realize that it has been unpopular to admit >before now, but
>everyone knows the truth even if your comrades won't >admit it. You are a
>party, or
>faction, or bloc.

I have said many times privately; I have said it recently on the Amici
Dignitatis List; and I say it here now...

I am NOT a member of any political party, in Rome or out of it. I do not
like party politics. And if, against my often-expressed advice, Nova Roma
DOES institute political parties, I swear I shall never join one while Nova
Roma stands.

Ita me Iuppiter. Ita me Mars. Ita me Minerva.

Fl. Vedius Germanicus can continue to say whatever pleases him to say or
what he imagines people will believe. I have given my word on oath.

Vado
Liberal Intellectual.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976297529/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Gender and names
From:	razenna@--------
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:51:10 -0000

People ignoring the substance of ones post and going for some cutesie
nit has discouraged many from posting again. As you said, it makes
one think they have wasted their time putting their thoughts into
shape and sharing them with their fellow citizens. Unfortunately it
is a common human behavior, so, fortunately, it is not simply a trait
of Nova Romans.

Be well, Cassia.
C. Aelius Ericius.

--- In novaroma@--------, "pjane@j... " <pjane@j...> wrote:
> My sincere apologies to both Formosanus and Draco for mixing them
up.
> I am rather discouraged to think that no one looked beyond my
mistake
> to read what I wrote, and I made myself late for work for nothing...
>
> P. Cassia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976297877/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Party Politics
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:55:20 -0500

Salvete;

So just to clarify, are you disavowing Formasanus' call for citizens to vote
for everyone who's signed your Amici Dignitas statement, simply on the basis
that they signed it?

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolaus Moravius [mailto:n_moravius@--------]
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 5:45 PM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] Party Politics
>
>
> Salvete Quirites
>
> Sic Fl. Vedius Germanicus:
>
> >Parties have platforms; you have the Amici Dignitas statement.
> >Parties run together as a bloc; you've just cemented that bloc
> >together,
> >by calling for people to vote based on the party platform. >You
> even have a
> >name. I realize that it has been unpopular to admit >before now, but
> >everyone knows the truth even if your comrades won't >admit it.
> You are a
> >party, or
> >faction, or bloc.
>
> I have said many times privately; I have said it recently on the Amici
> Dignitatis List; and I say it here now...
>
> I am NOT a member of any political party, in Rome or out of it. I do not
> like party politics. And if, against my often-expressed advice, Nova Roma
> DOES institute political parties, I swear I shall never join one
> while Nova
> Roma stands.
>
> Ita me Iuppiter. Ita me Mars. Ita me Minerva.
>
> Fl. Vedius Germanicus can continue to say whatever pleases him to say or
> what he imagines people will believe. I have given my word on oath.
>
> Vado
> Liberal Intellectual.
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> ___________________
> Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
http://explorer.msn.com






-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976298045/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Gender and names
From:	"Flavius Vedius Germanicus" <germanicus@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:57:28 -0500

Salvete;

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fortunatus [mailto:labienus@--------]
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 12:02 PM
>
> I usually try to refrain from "me too" posts. I read what you wrote and
> agreed with it completely.

Indeed; I thought that was the whole point behind setting the list to reply
directly to the author of a post (rather than to the whole list); to cut
down on the "me, too" posts and other chatter...

Valete,

Flavius Vedius Germanicus,
Candidate for Consul

http://www.goldenfuture.net/germanicus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976298177/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] The age question
From:	"Aurelius Tiberius" <kminer_rsg@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:36:29 -0500

I too wish to join the age revolution..

I Aurelius Tiberius Ronanus am 1,976 years old and I am Imortal!!!!! (Sorry always loved that line from highlander and just had to use it!!

heheheee

ATR



----- Original Message -----
From: Quintus Sertorius
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 8:12 AM
To: novaroma@--------
Cc: Quintus Sertorius
Subject: Re: [novaroma] The age question


8 Dec 2000

Salve All

I am jumping on the band wagon, I Quintus Sertorius am 38 years old.... I
now feel old looking at others ages!

Vale

QS

> It seems to be trendy to tell one´s age. So, here´s my age: 31 years. Not
to
> old for any office, I hope ;-).Caius Flavius Diocletianus


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976281010/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_-><br clear=all><hr>Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p>


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


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976300686/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Gender and names
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 18:46:36 -0000

Flavius Vedius Germanicus wrote (yes, it was really he):

> Indeed; I thought that was the whole point behind setting the list
to reply
> directly to the author of a post (rather than to the whole list);
to cut
> down on the "me, too" posts and other chatter...

My post was directed at the idea that only three people care about
the gender issue, and I was hoping to elicit civilized discussion
among people who can (as I hope you and I can) rationally disagree on
an important issue, while still working together toward the good of
Nova Roma. I apologize for not being clearer about my intent.

P. Cassia


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976301202/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Gallic Hexameter
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:55:04

Avete Populares

Sic scripsit Propraetor Lutecio:


>My opinion on this matter relies in one sentence that a french poet >once
>said
>"Aux âmes bien nées, la valeur n'attend pas le nombre des années"
>which could be translated (without the poetical souding, sorry) into
>"For those valuable, worthiness doesn't wait the number of years"

Respondeo: This hexameter looks familiar, Lutecio. Would it be from Racine's
"Britannicus", perchance?

Whatever its source, I find it sums up the age qualification issue
admirably. Permit me to offer a transposition into English hexameter:

"Souls born with few peers, Show worth that waits not upon their years."

Salvete atque valete

Vado
Liberal Intellectual
(Age 48).

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976301999/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: Sticking my nose in once again (was re: [novaroma] Philosophical question)
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:32:21 -0600 (CST)

> Will we still know in a millennium who Iulius Caesar was? I wonder. But his
> atoms are still out there, perhaps now being a nice bed of flowers in an
> Italian park, who knows ;-).

During the Middle Ages, it was thought that his ashes were inside the
copper ball atop the Obelisk of Caligula (the one that was moved to
St. Peter's Square by Pope Sixtus V in the 1580s), but I haven't heard
any supporting evidence for that.

Vale, Octavius


--
M. Octavius Germanicus
Curule Aedile, Nova Roma


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976303943/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Age Declaration
From:	"S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 20:21:02 +0100

Salvete omnes et salve Consul Audens,

It has been said, that a man's character is but a sum of that man's
characteristics and habits throughout his life. Now, let us apply this
process of rigid logic to our senior friend, Consul Audens. Then we come to
the amazing constatation that we have a citizen among our ranks who is 692
years old! And still alive and kicking. Let us all bow our head in humility
:-).

Valete et vale!
Sextus Apollonius Draco, civis Novae Romae
<< PETITOR AEDILIS PLEBIS >>
Legatus Galliae Borealis,
Procurator Galliae,
Vainqueur, ICQ# 32924725
--**--
There are no bad guys. Just disturbed guys.
--**--
Novaromain? Parlez-vous français? Cliquez ici!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_GalliaBelgicaF
Nieuwromein? Spreekt u Nederlands? Klik hier!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NRGallia_BelgicaBataviaD
Novaroman? Interested in philosophy? Click here!:
http://www.egroups.com/group/NR_Philosophy
--**--


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976304485/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Birthdays
From:	"pjane@-------- " <pjane@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 20:53:39 -0000

All this talk of age has me interested: Did the Romans celebrate
birthdays? Just for kids, or for everyone? Does anyone have any
information on birthday customs?

P. Cassia



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976308823/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Food For Thought
From:	"Nicolaus Moravius" <n_moravius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 18:33:57

Salvete Populares

I too would like to digress completely from the dominant topic of the
politics of reconstructionism, and offer a health tip, which I think is
especially important at this time of year when there is so much rich,
traditional fare on offer.

Traditional fare is what everyone likes at this season, but one can have too
much of a good thing. Traditional fare is very binding. To those who find
themselves traditionally bound, I offer this traditional remedy, commended
by Aristotle, Pliny the Elder, and others...

Constipation is caused by ingesting too much food that is old, complex and
dry in nature. It is hard to absorb, and in excess makes both the body and
mind sluggish. However, fresh produce added to such a diet serves as a
wholesome irritant to the bowels, and so livens up the digestive process,
helping the system eliminate poisonous fecal matter, thereby promoting
health and vitality.

Now, back to our politics...

Vado.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976312017/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Gender and names
From:	"M. Apollonius Formosanus" <bvm3@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 19:48:28 +0100

M. Apollonius Formosanus monibus Quiritibus S.P.D.

Patricia Cassia wrote:
Subject: Oh, Gods, I'm actually going to post on GENDER
Draco wrote, and Germanicus replied:
> > 6. We need a stronger and clearer affirmation of the provisions
> >in the Constitution against sexual discrimination. This should
> >include the right of all citizens to officially use a Nova Roman
> >name having a gender they individually deem most appropriate for
> >them, and an acceptance of their sexual identity or changes
> >therein as stated on oath or solemn legal affirmation.
>
> Here we go again. This has been hashed and rehashed so often, I
>will refrain from doing so here. But suffice to say you, Piscinus,
>and Vado are just about the only ones banging this particular drum
>any more.

Well, yes and no.

Nova Roma's approach has always been to adopt the practices and
customs of ancient Rome, except when they are clearly unworkable in
modern society. The most frequently cited examples of such adaptation
to the modern world are the role of women (who can vote and hold
office in Nova Roma, as they could not in Roma Antiqua) and the slave
system (vital to Roma Antiqua, universally regarded as abhorrent
now).

Another is sexual preference, which is up to the individual in Nova
Roma. In ancient Rome, homosexuality was the subject of complex
subterfuges and official condemnation.

The question of allowing a person to choose his or her gender (not
biological sex, but the choice of presenting oneself to the world as
male or female) is another such issue. Many, including, Piscinus,
Vado, Draco and myself, believe this is an area where we need to
allow greater freedom than was (presumably) offered in ancient Rome.
However, many others, including Germanicus, do not believe this.

Both of these beliefs are strong and rooted in the individuals' own
moral codes and perception of the world. I think it's important to
recognize that this isn't about one person or incident. The reason
this is an issue in Nova Roma is because this larger issue, how to
deal with transgendered individuals, is still being debated in
Western societies.

The current situation is a compromise. Like most compromises, it
satisfies no one.

I fully respect the right of anyone to believe differently from me on
this issue, and expect that continuing Nova Roma discussions on this
issue will reveal deep divisions. My point is that many who are not
"banging the drum" may share the beliefs expressed. It's important
for us not to let this division deflect us from working together
toward Nova Roma's goals.

Patricia Cassia

RESPONDEO:

I think that a little more needs to be said on this. When two groups
disagree on something in social/political policy and one group wishes
to grasp the power of the State and use it to limit the freedom that
the other would otherwise have, that is not the same as to simply
hold an opinion. It is in practical effect an act of agression
against the other side.

If we want people of different opinions to live together
harmoniously in a State, then the power of the State must not be used
by some against others. Harmonious disagreement in matters like this
must err systematically on the side of those who do not wish to use
State power to control others.

This is a general matter not limited to gender issues. If someone
wants to limit others in things that are matters of personal freedom
and dignity, he should be required to prove very clearly and beyond
any reasonable doubt that such a limitation is extremely important
for the welfare of all the citizens in the State. This has never been
proven in the case of the second Gender Edict.

The burden of proof for the necessity of freedom-limiting
legislation must always be on him who would limit the freedom of
others.

The present Gender Edict is not a compromise between the censorate
and the affected minority, but effectively one between the censorate
that is one extreme and the senate, which on the average has at best
a moderately conservative collective viewpoint. Thus the result was
even as a compromise not a fair balance in any sense, and the
censorate by using the latitude for interpretation provided for in
its legislation to push the balance still further against the side of
the minority member.

The fact that effective methods for bringing pressure to bear on
magistrates violating the principle of non-infringement of citizen
rights and dignitas are at present so egregiously lacking in Nova
Roma is the prime reason why I participated in the founding of the
Amici Dignitatis, and why I am running for praetor.

I thank Patricia for her highly insightful and reasonable post, and
I agree with Labienus that it was well worth while.

Valete!

Candidate's Page:
http://www.diocletian.de/elect/formosanus/

Marcus Apollonius Formosanus << CANDIDATVS PRAETORIVS >>
Paterfamilias Gentis Apolloniae (http://www.crosswinds.net/~bvm3/)
Moderator et Praeceptor Sodalitatis Latinitatis; Scriba Censorius              
ICQ# 61698049 AIM: MAFormosanus MSN: Formosanus
Civis Novae Romae in Silesia, Polonia
The Gens Apollonia is open to new members.
Ave nostra Respublica Libera - Nova Roma!
________________________________________
Si vis omnia tibi subicere, te subice Rationi. (Seneca)
(Se vi deziras subigi al vi chion, subigu vin al Racio)
________________________________________


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976314107/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	RE: [novaroma]
From:	Mike Macnair <MikeMacnair@-------->
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2000 18:55:52 -0500

Salvete!

Formosanus wrote,

>> Other legislation against libel and slander - if
>> well-written and not favouring those in power - will also protect us in
>> other ways.

And Germanicus replied,

>So are you saying that those in power, such as you aspire to be, should
not
>be protected against libel and slander?

This reply is dishonest. Any citizen who has followed the posts on the list
in the last 6 months will be aware that
(1) The Senate issued a "reprimand" to Fimbria, on the ground that
he had defamed L. Equitius IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY. The Senate rejected
proposals that this should be dealt with as an ordinary case of defamation.
(2) Several citizens, myself included, have objected to this action
on the ground that special remedies for defaming officials in their
official capacity is a crime not known to the Roman Republic, but belonging
to the Empire, and generally regarded as inconsistent with the character of
a free state.
Germanicus' post pretends that none of this has happened.

Valete,

M. Mucius Scaevola Magister


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/61050/_/976319776/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Propraetoris Edictum for Limes Cooperation
From:	"Marc " <RexMarcius@-------->
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 23:57:55 -0000

Salve Propraetor Galliae!

It is with great joy that I see your new province join our
Cooperation. Welcome and let us do some good work for Nova Roma! If
we succeed in our goals I am certain that citizens will have a lot
more reason to actively participate in our beloved res publica's fora.

I also hope that with the new endorsement by the Senate for the Limes
co-operation a lot more provinces will join this initiative and
thereby help to give the provinces an increased visibility and hgher
status.

Let us start work immediately after the elections are over and we
will have more time again for productive work!

Ave et Vale
Marcus Marcius Rex
Propraetor Germaniae

P.S.: Please contact the Limes Co-operation Scriba Gaius Flavius
Diocletianus, if you should not already have done so.
--- In novaroma@--------, Yann Quéré <yquere@l...> wrote:
> These is an edictum propraetoricium enacted by Ianus Querius
Armoricus Lutecio, Propraetor Provinciae Galliae.
>
> I. The Provincia Gallia hereby joins the Limes Cooperation.
>
>
> II. The co-operation is not restricted in its scope of application
but shall
> cover in particular the following fields:
> a) Provincial infrastructure (e.g. Web-Site development)
> b) Development of common provincial administrative standards
> c) Organisation of conferences and meetings
> d) Co-ordination of research projects of common interest
>
>
> III. The co-operation shall be implemented by all means necessary
and
> available in an internet-environment. In particular a restricted e-
mail-list
> shall be established for this purpose. A scriba shall be
responsible for its
> moderation.
>
>
> IV. The co-operation is open to all provinces of Nova Roma which
have been
> established by Senatus Consultum. The respective provincial
governor may
> join the co-operation by enactment of an edictum making the co-
operation
> applicable in the respective province.
>
>
> V. Any disputes arising out of the co-operation shall be settled by
way of
> mediation. A mediator has to be agreed upon by all affected
governors.
>
>
> Ianus Querius Armoricus Lutecio
> Propraetor Galliae
> Facto in Lutecia (07/12/2000)
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/61050/_/976319885/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->