Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 17:15:23 -0700 (PDT)

Salvete Omnes

As with the good Gnaeus Salix Astur, and with Ser
Oppius, I too long for a renaissance of ancient
sensibilities. Though no luddite, I, it is with
sadness that I gaze upon a world which has lost the
alure and the subtle mystery with which the classical
ancients infused their world. At times brutal, at
times timely, it still seems to me that for all the
toys we've made, we use them with less wisdom than
would an Aurelius, or even that most promethean
Caesar. Our own brutality mirrors theirs, yes, but
not our spirits. It is in this shadow, the shade of
the twentieth century after the nazarene, that I write
with apprehension. I do not offer blanket mistrust of
institutions, or persons, or human relations. I am
leary of a world view which gave us all eighteen
minutes to breathe a last breath, hug a loved one, and
kiss the sky goodbye. In case I have made this
reference to vague, 18 minutes is the approximate time
it takes a missile launched from a mid-atlantic sub to
wipe away a city anywhere in america or europe or
western russia. It is the time we all life on, whether
we know it or not. It is sometimes too easy, to
facile, to admire the men of the past. We do not know
what they would have done with the power our leaders
take for granted. That I come to this page every day,
in hope and anticipation, should serve some minor
notice of my own faith, sense, and sensibilities. As
with us all, though, I am a man come to maturity in a
human world of great decay, and gathering historical
forces. Decadence is not, cannot be, defined as the
breakdown in human realtions. Relations are by their
nature relative, subject to constant evolution and
mutation. Decadence is the awareness of the breakdown
in relations, and the inability to rise to the
challenge. I believe that we have come to call
ourselves, individual and aggregate, NOVA Romans,
precisely because the Roman way serves as an antidote
to the toxic environments in which we live. It is the
beginnings of a national identity, and we struggle
often to define it, ourselves by it, and its place in
the world we must at times wish to leave behind. So,
with Ser Oppius Flaccus Severus, I too say yes to Roma
Mater, however she chooses to manifest herself in our
relations one with the other.

In humble gratitude,

Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs Peregrinvs





--- Gnaeus Salix Astur <salixastur@--------> wrote:
> Salvete omnes.
>
> Once again, Flaccus has stated his thoughts in a
> precise and coherent
> manner. Thank you. People like you make Nova Roma a
> much better place.
>
> Some of you (not many, I guess) will be wondering
> where do I stand in
> the three tier division suggested by Flaccus. Well,
> you could call me
> the "Middle Point" man (just like Aristotles).
>
> I certainly share with Flaccus a great love of Rome
> and everything
> Roman, and I also believe we should try to rebuild
> the institutions,
> traditions and aspects of Rome as closely as
> possible to Rome as it was
> at the beginning of it's Golden Age (Middle Republic
> to Principate, in
> my opinion).
>
> However, we should not believe that Rome was a
> static place. Rome
> evolved, because change is unavoidable. At the
> beginning of her
> History, Rome changed very rapidly, and that was
> exactly the key of her
> success. She took just a couple of centuries to go
> from a small Italic
> town to the rule over Italy; and then, during the
> Punic wars, Rome
> changed in just fifty years from a regional Italian
> power-shifter with
> a land based Army to be the absolute ruler of the
> Western
> Mediterranean.
>
> It was when Rome lost this elasticity, this ability
> to adapt to
> changing environments, that decadence began.
>
> So why should us be less wise than Rome herself?
> Aren't we trying to
> resurrect "the Best of Rome"? Then, how could we
> leave behind the
> ability to adapt that so much meant in Rome's
> success?
>
> I'll also present my personal disclaimer. This is my
> opinion. I respect
> different oppinions just as I respect my own. So
> don't you take offence
> from any of my words. Remember it was not my
> intention to put it there
> in the first place.
>
> Thank you all for your attention, et valete bene.
>
> Gnaeus Salix Astur, civis romanus.
>
> --- Oppius Flaccus Severus <oppiusflaccus@-------->
> wrote:
> > Salvete Quiritibus;
> >
> > With all the debate that has occurred recently, I
> could
> > not help thinking how relevant these discussions
> were to
> > the perpetual issues of reconstruction, what to
> reconstruct,
> > how much, antiqua versus modern, etc. We have all
> always
> > had differing thoughts on these matters and this
> has
> > become yet again strikingly clear in the recent
> discussions.
> >
> > I was having an informal chat with a civis whom I
> admire
> > a great deal, regarding the issue of 'Rebirth
> versus
> > Reconstruction.' As I hadn't personally thought of
> it
> > in quite those terms before (my thinking had
> centered
> > around varying degrees of reconstruction,) it
> caused
> > me to want to think on it a good deal more as to
> clarify
> > my own thoughts.
> >
> > The realization I arrived at is -my 'ideal' tends
> more
> > towards a full rebirth of Antiqua. Huge
> disclaimer: the
> > following thoughts are mine alone and are not
> intended
> > to influence, anger or irritate my fellow cives.
> Many
> > will likely disagree with me (as is the way of
> debate and
> > discussion here in this forum,) which is
> completely
> > fine. For the record, I can but say yet again that
> > no matter what my personal state of agreement with
> > anyone is, my concern is for expressed opinions
> and
> > debate points -not the individuals themselves.
> >
> > Back to my point. As mentioned, they crux of so
> very
> > many issues here always, *always* comes back to
> who
> > favors what level of reconstruction. Recognizing
> that
> > none of us as individuals holds the complete
> answer,
> > I can but share my opinions.
> >
> > What are my thoughts? At the base level, quite
> simply if
> > I could, I'd quite happily be plunked back in the
> > height of the empire. Of course, we'd all have our
> > ideal periods in which to visit, but for me -fire
> > up the time machine and drop me and the family
> > off, next stop...Rome. -Not ancient Greece (though
> > I would certainly visit and bask in the culture
> > and architecture,) not Byzantium. (oh please!)
> >
> > So in other words; I cherish
> > Roma Mater in all the greatest of her glory and
> > majesty; period. No disclaimers, no exceptions,
> > no 'but I would like this, but I would not like
> that.'
> >
> > This is me, this is my personal vision. Of course,
> > we have a dramatically different notion going on
> here
> > in Nova Roma. -I knew this coming in and I stand
> by
> > Nova Roma's stated goals wholeheartedly. Do I
> expect my 'vision' or
> > wish to be
> > granted? Of course not. Do
> > I expect that others will agree to such a strict
> > construction of empire? Of course not. Do I expect
> > to maintain a steady state of compromise with
> those
> > that favor a much more 'modern' view of Rome?
> > Absolutely.
> >
> > Where I'm going is that we're all trying to build
> a
> > nation -some of us more 'conservative,' some of us
> > more 'liberal.' In realizing that my personal
> vision
> > may not be achieved, it will not stop me from
> standing
> > by Roma Mater, her gods, her wisdom, her virtues
> and
> > her very essence. I will always look to create and
> > maintain as many of Antiqua's traditions as
> absolutely
> > possible. -Even if said institutions are largely
> > in name only, or in a severely altered and watered
> > down form such as 'client/patron.' (No, I'm not
> going to
> > discuss that topic further right now.)
> >
> > So Quirites, that is where Oppius is coming from.
> Nothing
> > up my sleeve, I simply want Roma and as much of
> her
> > as possible with all her glorious attributes
> -"good" and
> > "bad."
> >
> > Let's examine the other side of the coin. There is
> > another group of people that have a vision that is
> > diametrically opposed to mine. (Again disclaimer,
> -this
> > is just a statement of observation and is in *no*
> > way intended to serve as any statement on my part
> as to
> > who is 'right' or 'wrong.' Everyone has a valid
> > opinion.) This other vision of Roma is something
> > at its fundamental core -quite different from
> mine.
> >
> > At the core of this other vision, is the idea that
> we have
> > come a 'long way' as humans, we have evolved to
> some
> > higher, conscious state of being, that we know a
> lot
> > better than our forefathers did how to live, die
> and
> > conduct the business of everyday life. This view
> 'seems'
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] What is the best of Rome? (Was Re: Rebirth versus Reconstruction: "What is the best of Rome?")
From:	Patrick Ferguson <pvitruviusiulianus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 17:17:09 -0700 (PDT)

--- "G. Noviodunus Ferriculus"
<Gaius.Noviodunus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Patrici Vitruvi Iuliane ac omnes cives Novae
> Romae!
>
> Patrick Ferguson wrote:
>
> > It seems that all of us wish to resurrect the best
> of
>
> > Rome. Yet we have made no clear definition as to
> what
>
> > that (the best of Rome is).
> >
>
> > -No, or perhaps an insignificant, animal rights
>
> > movement.
>
> > -Cheap, accessable public institutions such as the
>
> > baths.
>
> > -Little diplomacy and more of a "let's get this
>
> > overwith" attitude.
>
> > -Culturalism rather than racism.
>
> > -Upward social mobility.
>
> > -Social equity.
>
> -Sounder nutrition
>
> I agree that this point is not necessarily a public
> matter (it's up to
> everyone what he/she wants to eat. However I think
> the Government should
> encourage to eat like the Romans. In besides the
> recipes of Apulei, that
> were mostly used for the cena, we should be aware
> that the prandium was
> often cheese with bread and raw fruits. I would
> consider a Nova Romanus
> who is eating junk food (I remember a commercial
> about 2 years ago:
> "Gustus Maximus: iucundum est in MacDonalds ire")
> not to be respectful
> of Ancient Rome.

Good, but impractical.

>
> -Bilinguism
>
> The Romans had good schools. They learnt to speak
> and write both in
> Latin and in Greek, not to mention other italic
> dialects. This should be
> no different in Nova Roma. While our official
> language is de facto
> English (or even de jure? - don't know) we should be
> able to speak at
> least another wide-spread language fluently
> (Spanish, German, French,
> Russian) and why not a third one? Knowing several
> languages is an
> excellent mean to understand other people. I didn't
> mention Latin but
> those who can "speak" it fluently are blessed by the
> gods. But could be
> nice if our institutions also promoted the study of
> the latin language.
> Don't understand my wrong. I don't want it to be a
> condition to be
> admitted as citizen, but bilinguism should
> definitely be promoted by the
> government.

I am not so sure about this one. Bilingualism is
fine. But I don't think that I should *need* to be
able to speak another language in addition to my
native one to get around my own country. I do think
that if someone (including myself) were to move into
another country that they should learn the language of
that country rather than simply retain my own. This
would encourage division within citys on
cultural/language lines.

>
> I'd be glad to hear comments on my additions and see
> others add their
> items to the list.
>
> Valete bene,
> --
> Gaius Noviodunus Ferriculus
> Civis Provinciae Germaniae, Regionis Superioris
>
>
>

Valete optime :->,

Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus,

Civis Novae Romae.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 17:26:01 -0700 (PDT)

Salve Fortunatus,

It would seem this debate has brought some of the most
considered responses I have yet been fortunate to
read. Thankyou for the below...


--- Fortunatus <labienus@--------> wrote:
> Salvete Oppi Flacce Quiritesque
>
> Thank you for reintroducing this topic, Oppi Flacce.
> For three years
> now, I have been stating that the central tension in
> Nova Roma is that
> of what to keep of the old versus what to include of
> the new.
>
> > What are my thoughts? At the base level, quite
> simply if
.
>
> As I said, I'm in this third group. I'm there
> primarily because all
> history is a lie of one form or another, as all
> historians have biases
> which skew their interpretations of the evidence.
> Therefore, we will
> never really know what Roma Antiqua was really like.
> Even if we come
> extremely close, there wiil be plenty of historians
> who will validly
> disagree with our interpretations. As it is, we
> have a constitution,
> little difference between patricians and plebeians,
> very little
> institutionalized sexism, a completely altered
> tribunate, et cetera. We
> have also run into deep, deep problems every time
> someone's tried to
> legislate people into behaving a little more like
> their view of ancient
> Romans. We *cannot* escape the modern world, and we
> *cannot* expect our
> cives to behave like ancient people, even if we
> could agree upon how the
> ancients actually behaved. Therefore, it behooves
> us to work toward
> some compromise that captures the *spirit* of Roma
> while accepting that
> we cannot escape modernity.
>
> Valete
> T Labienus Fortunatus
> --
> "People do not like to think. If one thinks, one
> must reach
> conclusions. Conclusions are not always pleasant."
> -Helen Keller
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction: "What is the best of Rome?"
From:	Patrick Ferguson <pvitruviusiulianus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 17:31:55 -0700 (PDT)

--- "S. Apollonius Draco" <hendrik.meuleman@-------->
wrote:
> Salve Patrici Vitruvi,
>
> > It seems that all of us wish to resurrect the best
> of
> > Rome. Yet we have made no clear definition as to
> what
> > that (the best of Rome is). I believe that the
> debate
> > which has been taken place ("Rebirth vs.
> > Reconstruction") would be more appropriately
> titled
> > "What is the best of Rome?", since this is what is
> > being discussed the most. So I will lay down what
> I
> > think the best of Rome was with as few ommitions
> as
> > possible.
> >
> > -No, or perhaps an insignificant, animal rights
> > movement.
> >
> > I do not see why animals should have special
> rights.
> > They have no emotions. I think it is perfectly
> fine
> > to use them for transportation, food, sacrifices,
> and
> > many other things.
> >
>
> Don't they have emotions? That's what a worm with a
> brain who is nine
> hundered feet tall might say of you just as well,
> and see our buildings as
> termite colonies. Kick a dog, and you'll see his
> emotions.

No. I don't see emotions in animals. As far as I
know, when human children endure some sort of pain or
illness or undergo starvation, they will love their
parents even if their parents can't provide for them
(unless the parent(s) is/are the actual cause of the
problem and hates the children, and even then, the
children may love them.) If this happens with animals
they will get quite angry and attack or leave.

>
> > -Cheap, accessable public institutions such as the
> > baths.
> >
>
> I agree.

Thank you.

>
>
> (snip)
>
> > -Little diplomacy and more of a "let's get this
> > overwith" attitude.
> >
>
> This causes wars. And suffering. Misery. Pain. And
> more wars.

Either way suffering and misery will continue. Often,
though not always, war is the most efficient solution
to the problems.

>
> (snip)
>
> >
> > -Culturalism rather than racism.
> >
>
> I concur.

Thanks again.

>
> > I have seen no evidence for racism in Rome. In
> fact,
> > I have seen evidence against it.
>
> Cato Maior was an outright racist. He hated Greeks,
> and said that they were
> conspiring to destroy Roman civlization. I think the
> term "barbarian" comes
> from the Greek word "barbaros" (Latin "barbarus") by
> the way, which doesn't
> exactly have a nice connotation; one tends to think
> of wild, uncivilized
> tribes.
>
> It's true that some Romans, such as Tacitus,
> respected those "wilds", but
> that was more as a part of their own political or
> philosophical propaganda
> than anything else. Rome was, and Hellas even more,
> pretty xenophobic.

I was unaware of this, thank you for informing me.

>
> > Some of the
> > wealthiest Romans were in North Africa and of
> African
> > background. By the time of the Servian dynasty,
> over
> > a third of the Senate was of African background.
>
> Empire, but not republic. Romans thought of
> Egyptians, Persians and Syrians
> as effiminated, while Gauls, Germans and Africans
> were wild and uncivilized.
> It's true that there were many influences, and that
> Roma was much more
> multicultural than any society we see today, but
> that doesn't take away the
> fact that there were racists and xenophobes there
> just as well.

We are trying to bring back the best of ancient
*republican* Rome, however, I don't see why something
good ought to be excluded just because it is slightly
out of our time frame.

>
> > Often today, people who are in fact culturalists,
> are
> > mistaken for racists. These two are not the same
> > thing. Racism is judging someone by the color of
> > their skin rather than the content of their
> character.
> > There is nothing just or reasonable in this.
> > Culturalism is judging someone by the content of
> their
> > character (such as beliefs and actions) rather
> than
> > the color of their skin. I do see culturalism in
> > modern and Roman times. In modern times it is
> used
> > against Nazis and the Knights of the KKK. This is
> > just. However, there are certain areas (such as
> > affirmative action) where it is more difficult to
> use
> > since it may be miscontrued into racism. The
> Romans
> > often did a much better job at distinguishing
> between
> > the two and applying them correctly than we do
> now.
> > And even where they lacked, they did a better job
> than
> > anyone else at it upto that time and for a long
> time
> > after.
> >
>
> > -Upward social mobility.
> >
> > Through the army, even non Romans could gain
> benefits
> > such as citizenship or land. This is more than
> > someone in the third world could do now.
> >
>
> True.

Thank you again.

>
> > -Social equity.
> >
>
> I don't see Rome as an equal society. It was
> dominated by an upper class,
> who had 90% of all money and powers. Certainly
> during the empire and the
> post Sullan-period. I once again refer to Tacitus
> for a colourful
> description of how socially equal Rome was, or even
> better, Iuvenalis, who
> tells us the story of a patrician who, in a drunken
> mood, could beat up a
> poor cliens (not his own) unpunished just because he
> was rich and strong,
> and the other man wasn't.

In rights and laws there certainly were many
inequities. But as access to various services goes
(the baths, mass entertainment, water) one Roman had
life as good as the next. This is more than people in
the third world can say now.

>
> (snip)
>
> Vale bene,
> Draco
>
>

Valete optime :->,

Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus,

Civis Novae Romae.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction-Response to Labienus
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 18:00:15 -0700 (PDT)

Greetings,

Well written Lucius Procopius. Maybe a fund could be
started to raise funds for temples, or at least
shrines to begin with. Combined with a local fora
idea being discussed on the Egressus List, it could
involve members in the participation essential to
experiencing the sacred.

Ias. Serenvs
--- Lucius Mauricius Procopious <procopious@-------->
wrote:
> Salvete Omnes,
> . The
> philosophers teach us it is
> un-wise to yoke our happiness to such externals. If
> we seek to improve our
> bond with our God/desses and strive to live the
> virtues we will be fine. So
> let's strive to help each other live a life more in
> harmony with the virtues
> and the Gods and we'll find a way to compromise.
>
> Lucius Mauricius Procopious
> Propraetor America Boreoccidentalis
> (This is an unofficial post for which I assume full
> responsibility)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> procopious@--------
> ICQ# 83516618
> *America Boreoccidentalis Mail List
> http://www.egroups.com/group/AmBor_Waves
> * The Gens Mauricia
> http://www.geocities.com/procopious
>
> "Indeed, it is not by the plans of men, but by the
> hand of God that the
> affairs of men are directed; and this men call Fate,
> not knowing the reason
> for what things they see occur; and what seems to be
> without cause is easy
> to call the accident of chance. Still, this is a
> matter every mortal will
> decide for himself according to his taste."
> -Procopius of Caesarea (in Palestine) [born
> c.490/507- died c.560s]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus"
> <oppiusflaccus@-------->
> To: <novaroma@-------->
> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 7:03 PM
> Subject: [novaroma] Rebirth versus
> Reconstruction-Response to Labienus
>
>
> > Salvete Labiene et Quiritibus;
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fortunatus [mailto:labienus@--------]
> > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 1:28 PM
> > To: novaroma@--------
> > Subject: Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus
> Reconstruction
> >
> >
> > Salvete Oppi Flacce Quiritesque
> >
> > Thank you for reintroducing this topic, Oppi
> Flacce. For three years
> > now, I have been stating that the central tension
> in Nova Roma is that
> > of what to keep of the old versus what to include
> of the new.
> >
> > OFS: Then I happily lay down any credit for
> introducing
> > the discussion myself and am glad to be continuing
> to build
> > on your initial premise. As you see then, in this
> small point
> > we full concur -it *is* the central tension here.
> >
> > <snipped>
> >
> > Labienus writes:
> > I rather doubt that. There are always 'buts'.
> >
> > OFS: Then good sir, before getting to the rest of
> my
> > response, I might add another tension to that
> premise
> > on which this mail was founded. -That tension
> would be
> > the tension of one civis taking a very direct
> statement
> > made by another civis and piling many vast
> > interpretations upon it. I do not blame you for
> this
> > personally -I have been guilty of this myself more
> than
> > once and in such cases additional clarification
> was
> > required. So let me say to you -there were *quite
> clearly*
> > no 'buts' stated or intimated in my previous post.
> >
> > As you and I do not know each other personally, I
> admit
> > that you can but judge a few posts on a mailing
> list
> > as to what another civis 'would' or 'wouldn't' do,
> or
> > 'would' or 'wouldn't' want. *Unfortunately,*
> (emphasis
> > mine -I *do* hope we all meet some day,) we do not
> know
> > each other and while you are of course free to
> disagree
> > with me all you want, please do not do me the
> insult
> > of 'presupposing' what I might or might not 'do'
> in any
> > given circumstance.
> >
> > Now that we've hopefully cleared up that little
> point,
> > onwards...
> >
> > Labienus writes:
> > I expect that you would
> > prefer to keep modern dentistry, for example.
> >
> > OFS: See above. I will grant you another example
> -perhaps
> > more to the point since I'm not a major frequenter
> of the
> > dentist's chair: Latrines. Public latrines a time
> honored
> > tradition throughout the empire. So what about
> those? Would
> > I prefer my cushy fan-enhanced private bathroom
> experience?
> > Would I prefer to use my trusty Charmin instead of
> a 'sponge
> > on a stick?' Or, assuming we *do* have the public
> latrines,
> > do we still want them to blow their bilge into the
> Tiber,
> > or do we want them to run into a modern sewage
> treatment
> > plant?
> >
> > Labienus writes:
> > I admit that that's an
> > empirical and technological example, however. So,
> let's move to more
> > subjective and social examples.
> >
> > OFS: Yes, I knew you would get to those. Your
> sounding
> > board for emotive terms related to your modernist
> views.
> > Ok, let's see about those....
> >
> > Labienus writes:
> > You're honestly telling me that you
> > would have no problem with slavery,
> >
> > OFS: Let's stop here for a moment. Slavery. Well,
> first
> > of all mi Labiene, slavery was quite a different
> animal
> > than the popular conception of the 'Uncle Tom'
> variety.
> > Slavery is obviously a practice that has a great
> many
> > negative connotations; much like say...oh I don't
> know...
> > client/patron perhaps? Slavery is a topic that has
> already
> > seen a vast amount of contentious discussion on
> this list
> > before; a situation which I don't wish to
> propagate. Since
> > you and others that continually harp on the usage
> of
> > this term *seem* to be unable to view historical
> > scenarios in their actual context
> > without applying modern interpretations, there is
> little
> > hope of making you understand the institution in
> question.
> >
> > Labienus:
> > the oppression of women,
> >
> > OFS: No exceptions. Remember my original
> statement?
> > Why must you assume that I would share your
> apparent
> > characteristic of viewing a civilization that
> existed
> > 2000 years ago through 21st century eyes? Roma
> Mater
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Subject:	[novaroma] Computer Associates commercail
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 19:46:19 -0500

Has anyone seen the Computer Associates commercial with the Roman theme, as though the Roman empire existed till today?

QS


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	Patrick Ferguson <pvitruviusiulianus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 18:22:09 -0700 (PDT)

--- Iulia66198@-------- wrote:
> In a message dated Sun, 15 Apr 2001 8:15:26 PM
> Eastern Daylight Time, Patrick Ferguson
> <pvitruviusiulianus@--------> writes:
>
> <<Yes, I do see something that makes animals
> inferior to
> humans. They have no emotions>>
>
> Excuse me, but would you care to tell this to the
> dog I adopted from the shelter in 1990? A dog who
> still has not recovered from the abuse he received,
> apparently from someone else who considered him
> 'emotionless'? A dog who suffers from irreparable
> separation anxiety and who is still grieving the
> passing in February of his dog companion of 10
> years???
>
> <<Some people say that dogs have emotions and have
> unconditional love for their masters, but I doubt
> that
> that love would be so "unconditional" if the owner
> were no longer able to feed it.>>
>
> If you believe this, then you need to learn a bit
> more about dogs.
>
> I'm sorry you hold these views. It is no doubt a
> similar mindset which has made it possible to
> justify the atrocities committed against animal life
> on this planet, whether in a private home, the
> Colisseum, a research facility or a factory farm.
> It may also interest you to know that many of the
> people sitting in jail today for murder didn't start
> off their criminal careers murdering people. They
> started with the mistreatment/killing of animals and
> 'moved up.'
>
> Iulia Cassia
>
>

It just so happens that I do have a dog. He is
impatient and seems to think that the world is
centered around him. Even as a write this he is
barking. Yet I do not know what he is barking for.
He was let outside to use the bathroom 20 minutes ago.
And 10 minutes ago I saw to it that his food and
water dishes were full. We do not neglect him. Yet
he has no patients. My mom in fact gives him asprin
wraped in ham every day, as recommended by the vet for
his back problems. He is quite relieved to get this.
Yet once he has had it or before he has had it he will
bark for another whenever my mom is in the kitchen. I
*do* feel sorry that my dog is practicly, blind, deaf,
and getting more limp every day. And though I know
that this causes pains that he *can feel*, I do not
believe he has emotions. So I do know dogs.
*Perhaps* some dogs, such as yours, do have emotions.
But I say this with an extreme emphasis on *perhaps*.
In all my experience with dogs, I have had no reason
to believe that they have emotions.

As for other animals I will bring up other examples.
When I was a very young boy, we had a cat which we had
to return because, for no reason, she scratched my
right eye. We once had two bunnies. They were in the
same cage. Both were well fed and never mistreated.
When the weather became inclimate outside we would
bring them inside. There was no reason for it, but
one of the bunnies abused the other so often that we
had to give one of them up. A very similar thing
happened to some hampsters we had. The only pets I
have had that haven't had problems like this have been
ants (whom I have a great interest in and perhaps even
restpect for) and goldfish.

I hope I have made my point clear.

Valete optime :->,

Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus,

Civis Novae Romae.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction-Response to Labienus
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:27:33 -0500

Salvete Oppi Flacce Quiritesque

> OFS: Then good sir, before getting to the rest of my
> response, I might add another tension to that premise
> on which this mail was founded. -That tension would be
> the tension of one civis taking a very direct statement
> made by another civis and piling many vast
> interpretations upon it.

I've apparently touched something of a nerve here. My only point was
that, as a modern human who is used to modern conveniences and the
relative social freedoms of modern America, I suspect that you would
find the culture shock involved in being dropped into Roma Antiqua quite
uncomfortable. Please note the use of terms like, "I suspect," "I
rather doubt," and "I believe." These are all indicative of the fact
that I am entirely aware that what I write is based upon my own
suppositions and biases. You're quite welcome to believe that you would
be "quite happy" in Roma Antiqua (I am assuming you retain your modern
memories. If you don't, then your statement would apply equally to any
ancient culture.). I think you are, most likely, mistaken. Neither of
us will be able to prove his point, and it is a silly thing to argue
about.

> OFS: See above. I will grant you another example -perhaps
> more to the point since I'm not a major frequenter of the
> dentist's chair: Latrines. Public latrines a time honored
> tradition throughout the empire. So what about those? Would
> I prefer my cushy fan-enhanced private bathroom experience?
> Would I prefer to use my trusty Charmin instead of a 'sponge
> on a stick?' Or, assuming we *do* have the public latrines,
> do we still want them to blow their bilge into the Tiber,
> or do we want them to run into a modern sewage treatment
> plant?

You would be the one to answer those questions, at least as they pertain
to you. Note, BTW, that you are conflating your experience Roma Antiqua
in with questions about where we want to go as Nova Roma. Given that,
is it any wonder that I would conflate your statement about being happy
in Roma Antiqua with your desires for Nova Roma's future?

> OFS: Yes, I knew you would get to those. Your sounding
> board for emotive terms related to your modernist views.
> Ok, let's see about those....

They may be emotive to you. I am a fairly dispassionate man, and do not
invest them with much feeling, myself.

> OFS: Let's stop here for a moment. Slavery. Well, first
> of all mi Labiene, slavery was quite a different animal
> than the popular conception of the 'Uncle Tom' variety.

I am quite aware of what historians have to say about ancient Roman
slavery, and that it was most certainly not exactly equivalent to the
slavery practiced in the American South. However, slavery, in all its
forms, is predicated upon the idea that it is ethical to own another
human being. I find this usupportable. By claiming that you would be
"quite happy" in Roma Antiqua, you implied (to a degree) that you find
the institution at least acceptable.

> Slavery is obviously a practice that has a great many
> negative connotations; much like say...oh I don't know...
> client/patron perhaps?

The negative connotations are deserved.

> Slavery is a topic that has already
> seen a vast amount of contentious discussion on this list
> before; a situation which I don't wish to propagate. Since
> you and others that continually harp on the usage of
> this term *seem* to be unable to view historical
> scenarios in their actual context
> without applying modern interpretations, there is little
> hope of making you understand the institution in question.

My point was that slavery, as with the other things I raised, is not
acceptable in the context of the modern West. Those of you who argue
for pure (rather, as-pure-as-possible) historicity seem to fail to
realize that we are stuck with that context.

I have no problem looking at institutions in their historic context,
BTW. That I can't is an assumption on your part of the same order as
that which you accused me of at the beginning of your message.

> OFS: No exceptions. Remember my original statement?
> Why must you assume that I would share your apparent
> characteristic of viewing a civilization that existed
> 2000 years ago through 21st century eyes?

I do not assume such a thing, in part because I do not have such a
characteristic in the way that you seem to think that I do. My question
to you, poorly stated perhaps, was whether or not you would have no
problem with things like the oppression of women and slavery if you had
to live with them. Would you be "quite happy" dealing with them on a
day-to-day basis after living most of your life (yes, I am making an
assumption here that you didn't grow up in Kampuchea or the like) in a
place that did not have them? Your answer, apparently, is yes, because
you'd be within the context of ancient Roma and you're capable of
divorcing yourself from your (assumed on my part, perhaps erroneously)
upbringing.

> OFS: Yes, you can keep piling onto the et cetera list.
> A nice little term 'et cetera.' It allows one's point
> to be seemingly infinite.

It also allows one's lists to be shorter in the interests of a little
brevity, in order that one might come to the meat of one's posts in a
more timely fashion.

> Labienus:
> that you, like most
> people I know who make such statements,
>
> OFS: What type of people make 'such statements?' Those
> that disagree with you? That don't share your own
> particular vision of the world?

No. Those I know who make such statements. No more and no less, with
no judgement passed as to the worth of either the person who made the
statement or that person's views. Most people I know who make
statements like, "I would be quite happy to be living in X time and
place," do not mean that they would be quite happy to be among the poor
and oppressed of their chosen time and place.

> OFS: Two things. One, refer back to my initial statement.
> No 'buts' or exceptions. For clarification 'no buts or
> exceptions' means that a statement has no exceptions or
> alternate meanings.

Very well. You would be quite happy as either an emperor or one of the
slaves tasked with keeping the Cloaca Maxima flowing.

> Perhaps you should go back and reread my initial post.
> My role was not specified. I simply said Roma. Or
> more precisely, Roma between its founding and 305 CE. If I were
> to go back with my 'modern' ideals and my current mind set,
> I'd know enough to make it work, create an opportunity
<amputatio>
> To build on your previous example, I would know things
> for instance like calcium was good for strong teeth, that
> they need to be brushed and flossed (did you know that they
> had toothbrushes back then?) and that the fluoride mineral
> is good for reducing cavities.

I choose to avoid one of those endless debates about how effective or
ineffective modern knowledge might be in an ancient society. They just
go 'round and 'round without much purpose.

> If on the other hand, were I to go back *without*
> my 'modern' knowledge, then I wouldn't know the difference
> anyways since I would have no notion of a '21st century'
> world.

If you were to go back without your knowledge, then it wouldn't matter
when or where you wound up, as your new circumstance would be all that
you knew.

> Secondly, I am not of the school of thought that believes
> we've meaningfully 'evolved' over the last two thousand
> years. In fact quite the opposite; I think a darkness
> descended upon the western world with the ascension of Constantine
> ; a darkness that we only barely *started* coming out of in
> the very late 18th century.

There are several ways in which to evolve. Humankind has not evolved
physically much at all in its recorded history. Technologically, we
have come an immense distance. Socially, we have had our ups and our
downs, and I agree with you that the Middle Ages were, at least in the
West, one of the downs. Unlike you, I'd say that the 'darkness' began
to ebb in the Renaissance, primarily due to the popular acceptance of
the Classical age.

> The Roman world was quite a bit more advanced
> than our 'modern' sensibilities will allow us to admit. This included
> all major fields of study -from medicine, to science to all manner
> of technology. There's no good reason to suspect that we
> wouldn't have been walking on the moon in the 10th or 11th
> centuries (if not sooner,) had Roma been able to maintain
> its natural evolution.

I'd be a little more conservative, allowing for a moonshot by, perhaps,
the 16th century. The number 0 didn't reach Europe until the 1200s,
after all.

> Rome was also a place of opportunity. Slaves and women often
> ran affairs of state and enjoyed vast wealth and influence.
> Was this all good or evenly applied? No. Is this any sort
> of statement on what is right or wrong to do in *today's*
> world? No. But then you might
> do well to remember that I am not making a 'goodness' or
> 'badness' case here in any sort of 'modern' context.

Yes, fine. But we're talking about Nova Roma, which exists in a modern
context. To state that you'd be quite happy in Roma Antiqua implies
that you'd be quite happy if Nova Roma were to mimic Roma Antiqua
exactly. It was that implication that I took exception with, and
nothing more.

> Would I 'rather' go back as someone of wealth and
> influence? Well sure! Would I 'expect' it? Absolutely not.

That was my point exactly.

> Labienus writes:
> I would argue that there was little that was 'glorious'
>
> OFS: You can 'state' that things were or were not
> 'glorious,' but you haven't 'argued' them other than
> saying that this or that thing was 'bad.'

My apologies for not including the entirety of the argument. Note, BTW,
that I said, "I would argue..." and not "I am arguing...". Here, in
brief is the argument.

Glorious, adjective
1. Having or deserving glory; famous.
2. Conferring or advancing glory: a glorious achievement.
3. Characterized by great beauty and splendor; magnificent: a glorious
sunset.
4. Delightful; wonderful: had a glorious visit with old friends.

While the first definition of glorious could be used to describe just
about anything doing with Roma, the second is controversial when
applied to things like slavery (because glory has multiple definitions
as well, some doing with fame and some doing with being good), and the
latter two definitely do not apply to things which are bad. Therefore,
due to the connotations associated with the word, I argue that bad
things are not glorious. They are, instead, infamous.

> Labienus states:
> > in Roma
> > Antiqua's bad aspects, and that Nova Roma states explicitly that
> > we are attempting to recreate the *best* of ancient pagan Rome.
>
> OFS: *EXACTLY* my original point. 'Best' is subjective.

That's my point, too. As Roma Antiqua had that which was best about it,
it also had that which was worst. You have stated that you want Roma,
warts and all (to borrow one of Consul Vedius' expressions). I have
stated that I would prefer to remove at least the worst of the warts. I
fully admit that my perception of good and bad are subjective, and that
we will have to work together to establish a consensus.

> I intend to stand by historical accuracy as much as
> possible, but ONLY to the extent that it makes sense
> for the welfare of our population. Obviously we are
> discussing a 21st century institution within NR and
> NOT antiqua, to which I was *specifically* referring.

This was exactly my point, though I am more lenient when it comes to
historical accuracy.

> OFS: Actually, with some of the emotive terminology
> used I would have pegged you more in the 'second' option.
> But of course, using my own point -as we do not know
> each other personally this is an assumption which I will
> freely correct if mistaken.

I did not intend my words to be emotive. If you know of a less
controversial term for slavery, I would like to hear it. Perhaps we
could refer to slaves as the 'freedom impaired'? (As Foghorn Leghorn
would say, "That's a joke, I say, a *joke*, son!")

Note, BTW, an apparent (as in, it appears to me, and I might be
mistaken) bias on your part. You seem to claim that those who would
prefer a modern and, to use your term, "socialist" Nova Roma are
incapable of acceptably rational thought or of understanding history and
looking at historical institutions in context. This is not necessarily
the case.

> OFS: Well now! First of all, I haven't seen neo-nazi code words
> used anywhere, but will trust you on that point.

Do note that I did not mean to imply that everyone in the fourth group
was a neo-Nazi. It is quite possible to be conservative without being
fascist, racist, et cetera.

> To a *very*
> limited extent, I would agree that there are those that
> would come here to escape their current vision of their macronational
> world, to achieve some sense of personal power that they don't
> enjoy in the macronational world or to try and get away
> with doing or saying things that they never could in the
> macronational world. -On these latter points, I would
> fully agree that I've seen this from time to time. Something that
> any 'alternative' society such as ours will have to endure.

My main point was that we have both 'leftists' and 'rightists', and that
neither is necessarily any more historical than the other. There is a
tendency to conflate the right with historicity and hard, rational
thought, and the left with modernity and fuzzy thinking. Neither
assumption is necessarily grounded in fact.

> While we're on the subject though, let's take a look
> at 'political correctness.' In and of itself is fine, when it
> serves as a tool to make 'right' some form of actual injustice.

I agree with you entirely here. As I said, it is an unhealthy
over-extension of the desire to be inclusive, democratic, and fair.

> OFS: I partially agree with you. Not all history is
> a 'lie' however, in the absolute sense. History is
> a mixture of written 'fact' and interpretation. It
> is the vast number of interpretations that are
> placed on history which one has to sift through to
> have a chance of forming any sort of semi-accurate
> picture. That is why for instance, I read as many
> different accounts of a particular event/time period
> as possible so that my own opinion/interpretation
> can be formed.

As do I. And, having read what tip of the iceberg of historical
treatises I can, I make an opinion formed from my own experiences and
biases, attempting to recognize those biases for what they are and
realizing that the depth of my ignorance is immense. All human
knowledge is biased and incomplete, and all history is therefore biased
and incomplete.

> Going back to my original premise, I can't think
> of any better way to 'know' a culture than to live
> it in all its strengths and weaknesses. In my wistful
> example for instance, I would of course have no
> way of knowing how I would go back, whether or not
> the period would be ideal, what my role would be or
> anything of the sort. I also have to allow for the
> possibility that I would get there and say: "oh,
> this is awful! This isn't at all like the books say!"

So, you can't really say with certainty that you'd be quite happy, after
all. (Sorry, I just couldn't help myself.)

> But not having been there, I don't really know in
> any 'absolute' sense. The same premise could be
> applied to visiting another country. One can't go
> to another country and start decrying all the local
> practices -'good' or 'bad' simply because it offends
> one's 'modern' sensibilities. One must deal with
> the culture, laws and reality of the country in which
> one lives or visits.

One can most certainly make judgements about another culture. I find
the treatment of women in modern Afghanistan to be deplorable, and have
no problem making such a judgement. What you are suggesting, at least
at its logical extreme, is cultural relativism, which leads inevitably
to moral relativism. If a culture engages in practices which offend my
sense of morality and ethics, then I will pass judgement upon those
practices. I do not allow this to interfere with my ability to
appreciate that which I find laudable in any given culture, nor does it
make me believe that those who act out those practices are evil people.
However, when one chooses to be a moral and ethical person, one must
choose a system of morality and ethics by which to live. This choice,
of necessity, involves rejecting that which is opposed to one's chosen
system. At the same time, I admit that I am fallable, and I do my best
to keep an open mind and revise my system of values if it seems
appropriate.

> OFS: Again agreed. Nova Roma is not antiqua, a point
> I've openly declared in previous posts. I don't think
> for a moment that there's anyone who really, *truly*
> feels that NR will ever be anything ultra-close to
> antiqua.

Essentially, then, our viewpoints are not far off. We only disagree on
the degree to which one should bend in order to accomodate the ancient
practice.

> OFS: Your history with NR runs much longer than mine, so am
> again more than content to take you at your word on the
> legislative aspect. Personally, I see most of our reconstruction
> here as needing to be more cultural than legislative. For
> the record, nothing in my original post was intended to state
> or imply that I favor passing 'let's behave like Romans'
> leges.

Therein lies another related tension. Many of us here have an idea of
what it means to behave like a Roman. However, those ideas are not
alike, and it is only through the synergy of our various concepts of
Romanitas that our fuller community will develop. And yet, as modern as
most of us are, we need to apply some degree of controls to avoid
straying too far afield. The answer, I think, lies in our various
sodalitates and other cultural pursuits, which will hopefully evolve
into our most effective tools for educating ourselves about Romanitas
and Roman pursuits.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
"People do not like to think. If one thinks, one must reach
conclusions. Conclusions are not always pleasant."
-Helen Keller

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 18:55:38 -0700

Salve Quinte,

Actually I haven't, but it would be a *most welcome* change
from the ones I've been enduring of late :-)

Bene vale,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Quintus Sertorius [mailto:quintus-sertorius@--------]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 5:46 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail


Has anyone seen the Computer Associates commercial with the Roman theme, as
though the Roman empire existed till today?

QS


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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail
From:	"Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:37:34 -0500

It's GREAT!! We are a beta test market here in Winnipeg because of our
diverse demographic, so we get all the commercials first!! I can not wait
till you all get it! Makes you think.

QS

----- Original Message -----
From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 8:55 PM
Subject: RE: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail


> Salve Quinte,
>
> Actually I haven't, but it would be a *most welcome* change
> from the ones I've been enduring of late :-)
>
> Bene vale,
> Oppius
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quintus Sertorius [mailto:quintus-sertorius@--------]
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 5:46 PM
> To: novaroma@--------
> Subject: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail
>
>
> Has anyone seen the Computer Associates commercial with the Roman theme,
as
> though the Roman empire existed till today?
>
> QS
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Subject:	RE: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail
From:	"Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 19:08:21 -0700

Salve Quinte,

Well, no offence to anyone among us who may work for CA,
but our company and several companies that I work with
employ untold dozens of former CA employees due to CA's
practices and work environment. (Hopefully CA is only advocating the
'best of' the Roman Republic :-) <yes, Quirites an attempted
joke to lighten the current discussions.>

Bene vale,
Oppius
-----Original Message-----
From: Quintus Sertorius [mailto:quintus-sertorius@--------]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 6:38 PM
To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail


It's GREAT!! We are a beta test market here in Winnipeg because of our
diverse demographic, so we get all the commercials first!! I can not wait
till you all get it! Makes you think.

QS

<snipped>


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

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: A Boy Named Sue
From:	lsicinius@--------
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 02:24:14 -0000

--- In novaroma@--------, lsicinius@-------- wrote:
> --- In novaroma@--------, Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
> wrote:
> > Salve L. Sicinius,
> >
> > Please accept my apologies for not responding
> > immediately; I am still collating my reply. I should
> > have it to you by Sunday evening (EST) if that is
> > acceptable to you.
> >
> > Iasonvs Serenvs
>
> Salve Iasonvs Serenvs,
>
> There is no need of an apology. Sunday will be fine. Thank you for
> your assistance, and please thank your mother for me.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

> Salve Iasonvs Serenvs,

Did you happen to get that information? The recent events in Britannia
have increased it's importance.
Drusus

Subject:	[novaroma] Advertisement
From:	"Mark Bird" <markbird@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 12:21:22 +1000

Are we able to get a web file of this so as we can circulate amongst the
Nova community - as I would love to see it in Oz - I would not be concerned
about copyright as this is a well developed practice by large advertising
agencies to generate additional circulation of the Ad...

Marcus Sentius Claudius

Province Of Oz

-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: None
Subject:


Message-ID: <013c01c0c6de$fa245ba0$e8826c18@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
References: <LAEJJMMBCNCPKMADMDAGEEIMCKAA.oppiusflaccus@-------->
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300
From: "Quintus Sertorius" <quintus-sertorius@-------->
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list novaroma@--------; contact
novaroma-owner@--------
Delivered-To: mailing list novaroma@--------
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:novaroma-unsubscribe@-------->
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:37:34 -0500
Reply-To: novaroma@--------
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail
Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender:
sentto-1520-20998-987472990-markbird=waterbyrdfilmz.com.au@--------
om
X-UIDL: 251731656
Status: U

<html><body>
<tt>
It's GREAT!! We are a beta test market here in Winnipeg because of our<BR>
diverse demographic, so we get all the commercials first!! I can not
wait<BR>
till you all get it! Makes you think.<BR>
<BR>
QS<BR>
<BR>
----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Oppius Flaccus Severus" <oppiusflaccus@--------><BR>
To: <novaroma@--------><BR>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 8:55 PM<BR>
Subject: RE: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Salve Quinte,<BR>
><BR>
> Actually I haven't, but it would be a *most welcome* change<BR>
> from the ones I've been enduring of late :-)<BR>
><BR>
> Bene vale,<BR>
> Oppius<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Quintus Sertorius [mailto:quintus-sertorius@--------]<BR>
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 5:46 PM<BR>
> To: novaroma@--------<BR>
> Subject: [novaroma] Computer Associates commercail<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Has anyone seen the Computer Associates commercial with the Roman
theme,<BR>
as<BR>
> though the Roman empire existed till today?<BR>
><BR>
> QS<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]<BR>
><BR>
><BR>

Subject:	[novaroma] Reconstruction/Rebirth
From:	trog99@--------
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 02:43:21 -0000

snipped for brevity......

T Labienius Fortunatus wrote:

Therein lies another created tension. Many of us have an idea of what
it means to behave like a Roman. However, these ideas are not alike,
and it is only through the synergy of our various concepts of
Romanitas that our fuller community will develop. And yet, as modern
as most of us are, we need to apply some degree of controls to avoid
straying too far afield. The answer, I think, lies in our various
sodalitates and other cultural pursuits, which will hopefully evolve
into our most effective tools for educating ourselves about Romanitas
and Roman pursuits........

*******Salvete Honoured Tribune et Omnes:

What a lovely statement, in my opinion, and very reflective of my
visions. How very eloquently put, Sir. Ave!!

I feel too, that it is through positive interaction, that is, sharing
each others' common beliefs and interests, that we will produce the
strong sense of community imperative to the growth of Nova Roma.

I feel that we could argue into infinity the exingencies of what is
proper, ethical, and practical with respect to applying the practices
of Roma antiquita into our daily life. Of all 800 some odd Nova
Romani, we have 800 some odd philosophers. Indeed we would never
completely agree on everything.

Perhaps Governor Procopious is on the right track; we could assemble a
committee to produce something like a statement of "Articles of
Purpose", or "Articles of Belief" which would solidify to our
citizenship and to the world exactly what it is about Roma Antiquita
that we praise, and those things which we do not.

Such a statement could be reviewed and approved by the Senate, the
Pontifex Maximus, and posted on the website to the public.

I am of the belief that if we have not applauded any evolvement or
technological development in over 1500 years, our Roman ancestors
would laugh at us; if we have not learned from their mistakes, as well
as adopt their successes, they would be disappointed. So we should
not be wary of our modern developments. Certainly we should not treat
these as an intrusion on our celebration of Romanitas; the fact that
we hold their virtues and culture so dear is probably the factors they
would applaud the most.

Procopius also pointed out the basics of virtue; probably more
attention to those is indicated to build a strong sense of community,
and to make a stronger statement to the world about Mater Nova Roma.

I thank you for your reading time with respect to my thoughts.

Valete,
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo

Subject:	[novaroma] Nova Britannia Field Trip Reminder!
From:	"C. Minucius Hadrianus" <shinjikun@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 22:52:42 -0400

Salvete!

I just wanted to remind everyone about the upcoming Nova Britannia trip to
the Boston Museum of Fine Arts on Saturday, April 28th. Anyone interested,
please RSVP to me either on this list or to my email
shinjikun@-------- So far we have 3 "defintes" (including myself), and
3 "maybes" so we should have at least as good a turn out as out last trip in
March. Come and meet your fellow civies, and support Nova Roma! For more
details check out my earlier post, or contact me at the aforementioned
e-mail address. I hope to see a lot of you there!!

Valete!

C. Minucius Hadrianus
Legatus of Massachusetts
Pilus Prior Secunda Cohors
Legio VI Victrix

ICQ# 28924742

"Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." - Vegetius




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

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: A Boy Named Sue
From:	Iasonvs Serenvs Carolvs <iasonvs_serenvs@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 19:58:47 -0700 (PDT)

Salve Sicinius Drusus,

Do you have an alternate address, as i have tried
several times to forward to you the information you
requested, but have received a mailer-daemon on each
occasion?

Vale,

Ias. Serenvs




>
> > Salve Iasonvs Serenvs,
>
> Did you happen to get that information? The recent
> events in Britannia
> have increased it's importance.
> Drusus
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 23:02:18 -0400

Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus scripsit:

<<The belief that nature, animals, and such ought to be
tamed are inferior to humans and are here for -human
use.

I agree with this completely. Conservation ought to
be taken only for the sake of human enjoyment and/or
needs. I see no proof that animals and all other life
forms are equal to humans.>>

Um, WE are animals. We are very dependent on the web of life, and to try to
put ourselves somehow apart from that has led to the kind of environmental
disasters which are threatening our water and air quality right now, causing
the ozone depletion, and possible global warming.

The interconnectiveness of life is a pretty basic tenet of most pagan belief
systems (including the Religio Roma) so I'd expect to see that in any
reconstruction of the ancients.

Blessed Be
& Valete,
Helena Galeria

Subject:	[novaroma] Rebirth/Reconstruction
From:	truthsearcher13@--------
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 02:56:36 -0000

A. Spurius Hadrianus Omnibus S.D

So many interesting things said back and forth in these postings, all
with their "rightness" considering point of view. Still, I wonder if
the approach should be on the particular this or thats? I would
suggest that we turn not to the hard and fast rules, ways etc of any
certain time in Rome, for they all changed, but rather to the Virtues.
In, my opinion it is the virtues that made Rome great. And, the
virtues remain the same whether we are in 1AD or sitting at our
computers in the here and now. I would suggest that by looking at
each particular concern in the light of one or more of the virtues
we would not find our answers.
Vale

Subject:	[novaroma] error in post 2104
From:	truthsearcher13@--------
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 03:10:34 -0000

Aulus Spurius Hadrianus Omnibus S.D.
In the last line, I obviously (I hope) meant we would find, or
perhaps thinging, ...would we not find?

Many pardons
Vale

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	"Teleri ferch Nyfain" <rckovak@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 23:30:56 -0400

Salvete,
Draco scripsit:
<<- bloodsports
- slavery
- political murders
- conquest
- racism
- oligarchism
- sadism
- Interpretatio Romana
- power madness
- decadence (orgies)

I hope you find the above list not acceptable in a modern, 21st century
nation. And if you do, care to explain me why.>>

Aw, what's wrong with orgies? ;)

Unfortunately, most of the things on that list can be found in most nations
now, with the exception of slavery :(
Doesn't say much for modern life. At least they aren't 'legal' in most
places.

Valete,
Helena Galeria

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	Patrick Ferguson <pvitruviusiulianus@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:54:14 -0700 (PDT)

--- Teleri ferch Nyfain <rckovak@--------> wrote:
> Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus scripsit:
>
> <<The belief that nature, animals, and such ought to
> be
> tamed are inferior to humans and are here for -human
> use.
>
> I agree with this completely. Conservation ought to
> be taken only for the sake of human enjoyment and/or
> needs. I see no proof that animals and all other
> life
> forms are equal to humans.>>
>
> Um, WE are animals. We are very dependent on the
> web of life, and to try to
> put ourselves somehow apart from that has led to the
> kind of environmental
> disasters which are threatening our water and air
> quality right now, causing
> the ozone depletion, and possible global warming.

Biologically I agree that we ARE animals. However,
unlike animals, we have emotions (you can look at some
of my earlier posts in this thread (I think) for
reasons I have for my belief.) And it is because of
these environmental problems that I think conservation
ought to be used. So I partially but don't agree with
you.

>
> The interconnectiveness of life is a pretty basic
> tenet of most pagan belief
> systems (including the Religio Roma) so I'd expect
> to see that in any
> reconstruction of the ancients.

This (the Religio Romana) is not my area of expertise,
so I will have to stand on different grounds. As far
as I know, Romans did believe that nature ought to be
tamed. This can be gathered from the spectacles in
the colleseum and the fact that they were excellent
city builders. But I must admit that I am no expert
here and you could be right. Though for now I will
still retain my formerly stated beleifs.

>
> Blessed Be
> & Valete,
> Helena Galeria
>
>
>
>
>

Optime valete :->!

Patricius Vitruvius Iulianus,

Civis Novae Romae.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Rebirth versus Reconstruction: "What is the best of Rome?"
From:	"Nick R. Ramos Jr." <nramos@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 04:02:58 -0000

Salvete, omnes!

I have been following this debate with some interest, and I would
like to comment on a specific inaccuracy:

> > > -Upward social mobility.
> > >
> > > Through the army, even non Romans could gain
> > benefits
> > > such as citizenship or land. This is more than
> > > someone in the third world could do now.
> > >
> >
> > True.
>
> Thank you again.

With all due respect, and very much not intending to wave any
macronational flags - US citizenship can be obtained by serving a pre-
determined length of time in the US armed forces. Many Filipinos and
Mexican nationals can attest to that fact; in fact, when my mother-in-
law was naturalized here in San Diego, two Ukrainians who had been
serving in the US Marine Corps also became citizens. Granted, for
some third world countries, this is not an alternative - but it does
exist.

I will put in some 2 sestercii worth on this subject - I personally
have been attracted to Roma Antiqua because of the IDEALS that were
born there. These may not have always been attained, but many noble
attempts to reach them are recorded in history (and while that record
may be subjective, it can also contain some very hard facts; even
legends may contain truth, as Schiellemann can attest to :-)). We
ourselves reach to those ideals with varying degrees of success; and
although we may at times fail, it is that noble struggle that which
makes this endeavour worthwhile.

Optime Vale, et Iuppiter nos protegas!
Marius Cornelius Scipio

Subject:	[novaroma] Re: Computer Associates commercial
From:	"Julilla Sempronia Magna" <julilla@-------->
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 04:04:00 -0000

Salve, Quinte!

I just saw that commercial tonight and loved it! I wish I had it on
tape.


---
cura et valeas,

@____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
|||| http://julilla.tripod.com/
Daily Life in Ancient Rome
@____@ julilla@--------
||||

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Re: Computer Associates commercial
From:	"L. Cornelius Sulla Felix" <alexious@-------->
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2001 21:08:23 -0700

Ave,

I wonder if it is on adcritic.com.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
----- Original Message -----
From: "Julilla Sempronia Magna" <julilla@-------->
To: <novaroma@-------->
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 9:04 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Re: Computer Associates commercial


> Salve, Quinte!
>
> I just saw that commercial tonight and loved it! I wish I had it on
> tape.
>
>
> ---
> cura et valeas,
>
> @____@ Julilla Sempronia Magna
> |||| http://julilla.tripod.com/
> Daily Life in Ancient Rome
> @____@ julilla@--------
> ||||
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Subject:	Re: [novaroma] Rebirth versus Reconstruction
From:	LSergAust@--------
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:48:50 EDT

On 4/16/01 8:22 PM Patrick Ferguson (pvitruviusiulianus@--------) wrote:

SNIPPED

>..... The only pets I
>have had that have