Forum Romanum


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Withdrawl
From:	"Gaius Basilicatus Agricola" <jlasalle@kc.rr.com>
Date:	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:09:51 -0600

haha. I love that saying. I enjoy more our purely Roman discussions than modern nation bashing. But as we live in the modern world, it can't be avoided, I suppose. The reason for the withdrawl struck me as strange, thats all. And a little paranoid. If Bush did come after some Nova Romans, I think it would be great publicity. The only bad publicity is no publicity.

The Law Office of James L. LaSalle
417 East 13th Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
(816).471.2111
(816).510.0072(cell)
(816).471.8412(Fax)
The information contained in this e-mail message is attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by using the contact information in the "reply to" field above and return the original message to the sender. Thank you.
----- Original Message -----
From: URCITANUS
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Withdrawl

Carissimus G. Basilicatus Agricola,
I have been enjoying your letters with your interesting point of
view...´til you said I had "the vision of nazi Republicans who think
Reagan was a comunist".
Don´t they believe it?
LOL ;)

Vale

antonius adrianus urcitanus
----- Mensaje Original -----
De: "Gaius Basilicatus Agricola" <jlasalle@kc.rr.com>
Fecha: Jueves, Diciembre 5, 2002 4:51 am
Asunto: Re: [Nova-Roma] Withdrawl

> <html><body>
>
>
> <tt>
> Its interesting to see how different folks have interepreted this
> withdrawl. I saw foaming at the mouth liberals. antonius adrianus
> urcitanus visioned nazi republicans who think Reagan was a
> communist. Whatever the case, it warms my heart to see vitriolic
> conflict amongst citizens. Vicious debate is so very Roman.
>
>
>
> Gaius Basilicatus Agricola
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Law Office of James L. LaSalle
>
> 417 East 13th Street
>
> Kansas City, Missouri 64106
>
> (816).471.2111
>
> (816).510.0072(cell)
>
> (816).471.8412(Fax)
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message is attorney
> privileged and confidential information intended only for the use
> of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message
> is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
> responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
> this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender
> by using the contact information in the "reply to" field
> above and return the original message to the sender. Thank you.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: URCITANUS
>
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 8:12 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Withdrawl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear and confused Marcus,
>
> It´s a great joy, for not saying even an honour for me, to se
> how
>
> narrow-minded little people says good-bye to this community.
> Roman gave
>
> our western civilization many fundamental notions. Notions that
> other
>
> civilizations, like the muslim one, do not have. The most
> important
>
> they left to us is the capacity to criticise everything human
> mind can
>
> intellectually criticise. It´s gruesome that you, who really
> sound like
>
> someone grown-up, give such a stupid reason to quit this
> community. You
>
> leave NR because "Bush says so"...LOL
>
>
>
> So long, good bye, be happy under your Republican gov. Leave
> this "evil
>
> and anti-american forum" because one year ago some crazy
> terrorists
>
> turned their eyes towards America, the nation we all love, so
> similar
>
> to ancient Rome.
>
>
>
> antonius adrianus urcitanus
>
>
>
> ----- Mensaje Original -----
>
> De: MVariusPM@aol.com
>
> Fecha: Miercoles, Diciembre 4, 2002 9:01 am
>
> Asunto: [Nova-Roma] Withdrawl
>
>
>
> > <html><body>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > <tt>
>
> > Salve,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Because of the current political atmosphere in the macro
> state
>
> > of the
>
> >
>
> > United States, with regret, My wife and I must withdraw our
>
> > membership in the
>
> >
>
> > Nova Roma organization. The goal of establishing a soverign
> state
>
> > of "Nova
>
> >
>
> > Roma" for the organization is not compatible with
> the current
>
> > leader of
>
> >
>
> > America. His statement that "if you are not with
> us you are
>
> > against us" and
>
> >
>
> > the establishment of the "Homeland
> Security" department
>
> > exclude involvement
>
> >
>
> > by individuals in groups that do not support governmental
>
> > hemogeony.
>
> >
>
> > Therefore, we cannot be a part of a group that wishes to
> break
>
> > away from the
>
> >
>
> > established macro government. An action of that nature
> could be
>
> > viewed as
>
> >
>
> > subversive and be deemed terroristic in nature. This is not
> what
>
> > we intend
>
> >
>
> > and we do not want to be affiliated with. Please, remove
> all
>
> > membership
>
> >
>
> > reference as required for "Marcus Varius
> Pullus" and
>
> > "Flaminia Pullus".
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > In a better place, in a better world, it would be
> delightful to
>
> > contiue the
>
> >
>
> > discussion of Roman culture and organization. In the
> current time
>
> > and
>
> >
>
> > setting, it cannot be. Discussion is one thing,
> repercussions
>
> > because of
>
> >
>
> > one's affiliation's is another. Sometimes the world
> changes,
>
> > sometimes it
>
> >
>
> > does not. History does have a way of repeating itself and
> the
>
> > terrible parts
>
> >
>
> > are usually the ones that no one expects.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Valate,
>
> >
>
> > Marcus Varius Pullus
>
> >
>
> > and
>
> >
>
> > Flaminia Pullus
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > </tt>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > <tt>
>
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
> >
>
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > </tt>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of
>
> > Service.</tt></br>
>
> >
>
> > </body></html>
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> </tt>
>
>
>
>
> <tt>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> </tt>
>
>
>
>
>
> <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.</tt></br>
>
> </body></html>
>
>

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Average Citizens
From:	"sceptia <sceptia@yahoo.es>" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 01:31:03 -0000

Salvete omnes

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 12/7/2002 4:37:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> richmal@a... writes:
>
> > Perhaps that is what you saw. I saw a demagogic speech to make
his > > Tribunus campaign into a referendum on Sulla's veto of gens
reform. > > It didn't take much reading between the lines to figure
out the > > general gist was "A vote for Athanasius is a vote
against the Sullan > > oligarchies." That gist was readily apparent
to L. Didius Geminus > > Sceptius who subsequently wrote a message to
hitch his wagon up to > > the same horse using the "clientelar
system" strawman as his footman.
>

SCE: Well, before stating such thing you should hear to me before,
just an advice. :-)

Athanasius pointed out a few things I consider important, but BEFORE
he did so, I asked Honorable Maximus (Not Sulla) about his ideas on
Gens Reforms and suggested that maybe could it be that Historical
motivation wasn't the real point. That before Athanasius asked about
virtues. My english can be poor, but the idea was there before (And I
see Honorable Maximus didn't reply yet).

I do not hitch my wagon nor Clientelar System as my footman. Just a
reply to his "Candidate questions". But any one is free to understand
whatever they like... :-)

> Let me make one thing perfectly clear, Cassius Calvus, that I find
your > statement completely accusatory. Let me further clarify...
>
> 1. I never participated in the gens reform debate.
> 2. I do not present myself to be against ANYONE, let alone
this "Sullan > oligarchies" you mention -- which I would very much
like for you to clarify > this statement (who are the members of this
oligarchy?).

SCE: A good question... :-)

> 3. The actions of L. Didius Geminus Sceptius are his own. If they
were > motivated by my post then so be it, but I have never engaged
in a dialogue > with the man before - nor am I aware of his character.

SCE: Athanasius clarify all here. I can say the same, never talked to
him before but his post were interesting to me because could make
some questions I made *before* rise again.
My actions and my points of view are mine, surely, maybe shared with
some citizens but primarily mine. And I wish to offer Athanasius, as
any other Candidate to the Tribunician Office, a dialogue whenever he
desires to be aware of my character and mankind. :-)

> Furthermore, I would be very disappointed if someone voted for me
as Tribune > because they thought I was "against" someone else. Part
of my platform in > the election was, "To cooperate with other
magistrates to promote the best > interests of Nova Roma." This
promise could not be fulfilled if I was > against anyone. If
elected, my role would be to stand for justice and the > people. If
I stood for my own self interests (as you claim) then I would be
> a liar and fake. I know I am no liar, and I know I am no fake.

SCE: As the "guilty" for this discussion, I wish to offer Athanasius
my sincere sorrow for the incident. I share his idea of cooperate
with those magistrates who promotes the best to Nova Roma, and again
I wish that demagogic statements were away from the latest issue.

Vale bene,

L. Didius Geminus Sceptius
- Candidate to Tribunus Plebis -

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Nationality and Nova Roma (Was: Re: Withdrawl)
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@yahoo.es>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 03:16:32 +0100 (CET)

Salvete Quirites; et salve, Caesariensis.

--- me-in-@disguise.co.uk escribió:

<<snipped>>

> I have to admit to not knowing much about Iberia in general. I
> assumed that the present government had devolved substantial autonomy
> to Barcelona and Bilbao as regional capitals, thereby making it no
> longer a truly centralised nation.

What you say is, obviously, true. Spain is not a centralised nation.
However, for some strange reason that is difficult to understand,
Spaniards do not use the term "federalism" when referring to their
political system, even if it actually is pretty close to what most
people understand as "federalism" (you know; European funny mental and
linguistic quirks, like British "public schools" ;-) ).

Generally speaking, your assumptions about the Spanish political system
are pretty correct.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Tribunus Plebis
Triumvir Academiae Thules
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules
Lictor Curiatus.

___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sorteos
Consulta si tu número ha sido premiado en
Yahoo! Sorteos http://loteria.yahoo.es

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Nationality and Nova Roma (Was: Re: Withdrawl)
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@yahoo.es>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 03:29:03 +0100 (CET)

Salvete Quirites; et salve, Caesariensis.

--- me-in-@disguise.co.uk escribió:

<<snipped>>

> Spain is a federal country (whatever a few Basques might think!)
> within a greater coming Federation so he can't be excused on that
> ground :)

As I have already said, this statement is more or less correct :-).

<<snipped>>

> But it has unfortunately been somewhat hijacked by the National Front
> and Little Englander Tories in recent times. I meant of course that
> most people there have a local allegiance more than a national one.

That, I am afraid to say, is also a problem in Spain, where national
symbols have been "hijacked" (a pretty good term) by a few and
politically unimportant right-wing activists.

This is something that might come as a surprise to many Americans, who
are lucky enough to keep their national symbols as they should be: a
symbol of their nation, regardless of political affiliation.

As for local affiliation, the same holds true for Spain.

> For myself, I come from what amounts to an autonomous British region
> of France and now reside in the Irish Republic so I'm well away to
> European Federalism!

I feel the same, even if I live in Madrid, where I was born and raised
:-).

<<snipped>>

> There's certainly a mad minority who see the current US security
> worries as part of an evil One World Government Conspiracy (though
> why that should be evil if it ends the likes of Saddam Hussein and
> protects us from the de facto government of unaccountable
> corporations defeats me). Myself, I susbscribe to the cock-up theory
> of history: just because something could be a conspiracy or looks
> like it might be squeezed into one rarely means it is one as much as
> that people of like (or little) mind tend to panic in like fashion.

I agree that conspiracies are far less common than they sometimes seem :-).

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Tribunus Plebis
Triumvir Academiae Thules
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules
Lictor Curiatus.

___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sorteos
Consulta si tu número ha sido premiado en
Yahoo! Sorteos http://loteria.yahoo.es

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Announcement of Candidacy: Curio for Aedilis Plebis
From:	Kristoffer From <from@darkeye.net>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 03:56:47 +0100

"curiobritannicus " wrote:
> I have searched the Tabularium for the lex concerning repeat
> magistracies, and have been unable to find anything against it. If
> any of our law experts know otherwise, please say so!

Salve, Marce Scriboni Curio Britannice.

I snagged the below quote from a recently passed lex, the "Lex Salicia
de Prorogatione et Cumulatione":

> III. In this first round of candidacy presentation, no current
> holder of a magistracy shall present his or her candidacy for
> that very same position (prorogatio). No individual shall
> present his or her candidacy to more than one magistracy
> (cumulatio).
>
> IV. If, after the kalendas of December, a certain magistracy
> has a number of legal candidates that is lower than the number
> of offices to be filled, the period of presentation of
> candidacies shall be extended by an additional nundina for
> that magistracy only. During this extended period, the
> provisions indicated in paragraph III of this lex shall be
> considered temporarily withdrawn for candidacies to that
> magistracy.

I am most definitely no legal expert, but I do believe this will stop
you from presenting your candidacy for a position you've been holding
this last year, until an insufficient number of candidates are available
AND december's passed.

Do not trust me on this one, ask someone who actually know what they're
talking about. :)

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Citizens and Senators
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 22:10:18 EST

L. Didius Geminus Sceptius,

I have to wonder why you are baiting me on the main list, since I'm not
standing for any magistracy. Oh but I see you are.

> Well Athanasie, not only you are curious about this "higher
> standards". As far as Honorable Fabius Maximus enjoys asking and
> never answering questions to the candidates,

Well, Didus I have to ask you, what the Hades are you talking about?

I'd like to know what he > thinks about clientelar system, so "High" for the
> rest of the
> quirites, or what kind of virtues he has over the rest of the
> citizenship.

Since you requested my thoughts, I'll tell you. The client system would have
to be different here than in old Rome, since we operate virtually. I see
this more like a mentoring thing but following the old Tullian standards, I
am still obligated to you, and you to me. If I fail in my obligation, then
you are free to seek another mentor/patron.
Obligation doesn't necessary means you have to agree with everything I say or
do, I cannot expect you to do so, I'm hardly supporting your household like
the old patrons, but generally we would be in agreement. The SCA runs
something similar as you come up through the ranks. In return for help
around the camp, the vet fighter teaches the newbie all the tricks.
I take such relationships very seriously, but not everybody here would do so,
thus a similar system would be prone to failure.

Becouse even though he remains a citizen "all the same" > his words reveal a
> strong selfconscious range that any other citizens ain't get. You know, he
> taps on the shoulder of his "equals" while a grin over his chin shows that
> you are less than him... Curious virtue, I guess. But I wait for his
> honorable answers, surely as
> virtuous as himself. :-)

You get that, because that's what you want to get. I can't dictate what you
believe, just because you are using this as a platform for your Tribunate
candidacy.
But believe me when I say things change for you when you become a Consular
magistrate. Because all of a sudden you realize that you have been entrusted
with an organism that is rather fragile and the least misstep has grave
consequences. And until you have walked a mile in my boots you will never
understand.

Once you become a Senator you are held to higher standard then a privatis.
Why? Because once those virtual purple stripes are attached to you, you in
turn are strangely enough more attached to this Republic. You are visible.
The people assume you represent all of Nova Roman government. You now worry
about Senate calls, where are you going to be when the Senate summoned. In
fact you stop taking trips unless your lap top is coming along and you have a
place to plug in your modem.
You worry about the Consulta, how is this going to affect the people, what is
this going to do to our sacred mission, does this really help or is this
about century points?
Finally, what do the people themselves feel about this consulta? Remember we
the Senate just advise the Consuls, but they usually take our advice.
How many privatis have to worry about that? There are good people here, I
have no doubt, that are devoted and staunch practicers of the virtues and
Religio, and they serve Nova Roma in their own way, but it becomes more
heightened when you get your seat.
I have served Nova Roma in public office for 3 1/2 years now. It does not
get easier.
In fact it gets much harder. For if you are truly interested in seeing this
republic grow, you make sacrifices of your own time to give more to Nova
Roma. And as you spend more time with Nova Roma's government you spend less
time on yourself. And that is the trap of our fair Republic.
I hope this answered your question.

Q. Fabius Maximus

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Announcement of Candidacy: Curio for Aedilis Plebis
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 00:59:28 -0600

Salvete

>>IV. If, after the kalendas of December...
>
> I am most definitely no legal expert, but I do believe this will stop
> you from presenting your candidacy for a position you've been holding
> this last year, until an insufficient number of candidates are available
> AND december's passed.

No. The Kalends occur on the first day of a month, so the "kalendas of
December" refers to the first day of December. Therefore, since no
legal candidates are on the ballot, paragraph III of Lex Salicia de
Prorogatione et Cumulatione is temporarily suspended.

Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
"Since death alone is certain and the time of death uncertain, what
should I do?"

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Announcement of Candidacy: Curio for Aedilis Plebis
From:	Kristoffer From <from@darkeye.net>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:51:21 +0100

Fortunatus wrote:
> No. The Kalends occur on the first day of a month, so the "kalendas of
> December" refers to the first day of December. Therefore, since no
> legal candidates are on the ballot, paragraph III of Lex Salicia de
> Prorogatione et Cumulatione is temporarily suspended.

Salvete, Tite Labiene Fortunate et Marce Scriboni Curio Britannice.

Thanks for the correction, Fortunatus. See why you shouldn't take my
word for it, Marcus? I don't even understand basic latin terminology, a
failing I hope to one day rectify.

Sorry if I caused a ruckus, now I'll be quiet. :)

Valete, Titus Octavius Pius.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Citizens and Senators
From:	"sceptia <sceptia@yahoo.es>" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 11:21:28 -0000

Salve Fabius Maximus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, qfabiusmaxmi@a... wrote:
>
> L. Didius Geminus Sceptius,
>
> I have to wonder why you are baiting me on the main list, since I'm
not> standing for any magistracy. Oh but I see you are.

SCE: Well, Honorable Maximus, that of "baiting" you must be an
impression. Sure you are not running for any magistrature, but of
course you are asking the candidates to some of them (Tribunus
Plebis) and that means you want an answer from them. So it is not
a "baiting" but a Honest reply to your questions. But as a citizen I
guess I'm able to ask you in return, because the list of titles you
hold enables you to answer. :-)

>
> > Well Athanasie, not only you are curious about this "higher
> > standards". As far as Honorable Fabius Maximus enjoys asking and
> > never answering questions to the candidates,
>
> Well, Didus I have to ask you, what the Hades are you talking about?

SCE: You can remember, not the Hades but your latest questions about
our posture on Gens Reform, on certain Lex passed... memory can't be
so bad, Honorable Maximus. :-)
In return I asked you something I'm too lazy to rewritte here again.
But just because as me myself check the List when neccessary, I guess
any other citizen can do the same. Even better. :-)

>
> I'd like to know what he > thinks about clientelar system,
so "High" for the > > rest of the > > quirites, or what kind of
virtues he has over the rest of the > > citizenship.
>
> Since you requested my thoughts, I'll tell you. The client system
would have > to be different here than in old Rome, since we operate
virtually. I see > this more like a mentoring thing but following
the old Tullian standards, I > am still obligated to you, and you to
me. If I fail in my obligation, then > you are free to seek another
mentor/patron.

SCE: So you recognyze a Clientelar System. Oh, good. :-)
That means, for example, that if one day I wish to leave my Gens
because I disagree my paterfamilias ideas and he fail on that I can
go?.

> Obligation doesn't necessary means you have to agree with
everything I say or > do, I cannot expect you to do so, I'm hardly
supporting your household like > the old patrons, but generally we
would be in agreement. The SCA runs > something similar as you come
up through the ranks. In return for help > around the camp, the vet
fighter teaches the newbie all the tricks.> I take such relationships
very seriously, but not everybody here would do so, > thus a similar
system would be prone to failure.

SCE: A couple of questions, maybe I'm not aware... what the SCA is?
what do you mean by a vet fighter?. :-)

> You get that, because that's what you want to get. I can't dictate
what you > believe, just because you are using this as a platform for
your Tribunate > candidacy.

SCE: Do you think so? First of all, I'm not using that as a platform,
is just a personal view on you. I can be wrong, I can be right (As
far as we communicate by i-net, a pity-Would like to know personally
all of you americans, including Gens Cornelia, so full os citizens
and the proud of NR :-)-) but I never thought of using it as
a "platform" for no train. Things are easier than that. :-)

> But believe me when I say things change for you when you become a
Consular > magistrate. Because all of a sudden you realize that you
have been entrusted > with an organism that is rather fragile and the
least misstep has grave > consequences. And until you have walked a
mile in my boots you will never > understand.

SCE: Sure I did not walked on your mocasins, but I have tried.
Because not being a Consular Magistrate I can figure myself and
picture what could it be, and I read the List, and... so I can figure
a little what can it be.
But also I do not need to be running for Consularship to know what a
Magistrate can be. The entrust you mentioned begins being a citizen,
and then being any other thing, because a Magistrature of any kind
means WORK. So I felt on a sort of contract when Aedilis, Scriba, now
Legatus and when Tribunus if I pass it. I do not need to know the
Consularship (Very high and difficult indeed) to know my
participation level and working in NR.
I hope your boots then would be comfortable, because I guess some
anger on your walking. :-)

> Once you become a Senator you are held to higher standard then a
privatis. > Why? Because once those virtual purple stripes are
attached to you, you in > turn are strangely enough more attached to
this Republic. You are visible. > The people assume you represent
all of Nova Roman government. You now worry > about Senate calls,
where are you going to be when the Senate summoned. In > fact you
stop taking trips unless your lap top is coming along and you have a
> place to plug in your modem. > You worry about the Consulta, how is
this going to affect the people, what is > this going to do to our
sacred mission, does this really help or is this > about century
points?

SCE: Honorable Maximus, I just replied above but I should add
something.
You are as visible as you want. A Senator, a Pontifex, any office,
any citizen, can be as visible as he/she wants to be. Is not a
problem of the office but of the personal wish to get involved. So I
ask again before the next paragraph, why you believe you have to have
higher virtues than a citizen and then feel yourself superior to a
citizen because of those higher standards?. A quirite can be as much
virtous as you are (I do not talk of myself, I'm a Skeptic :-D) but
is not the Office, but the individual.

> Finally, what do the people themselves feel about this consulta?
Remember we > the Senate just advise the Consuls, but they usually
take our advice. > How many privatis have to worry about that? There
are good people here, I > have no doubt, that are devoted and staunch
practicers of the virtues and > Religio, and they serve Nova Roma in
their own way, but it becomes more > heightened when you get your
seat.

SCE: Again, Honorable Maximus, the seat is a good place to sit and
vote, but is the individual who makes the work, not the office.
Me as a quirite can be worried for the issues voted in the Senatum,
even though I'm not a private. Me as a quirite can be proud of my
Senators, even though not being one of them. But creating a certain
barrier between people just because of the office... well, just
figure my thoughts. :-)

> I have served Nova Roma in public office for 3 1/2 years now. It
does not > get easier.> In fact it gets much harder. For if you are
truly interested in seeing this > republic grow, you make sacrifices
of your own time to give more to Nova > Roma. And as you spend more
time with Nova Roma's government you spend less > time on yourself.
And that is the trap of our fair Republic.> I hope this answered your
question.

SCE: Yes, is a half answer but fairly enough. It is important the
speaked as much as the not said.
I have served to Nova Rome for just 1 year and 1/2, but I get
involved even when my mather dead in june of the present year, even
now my father is not well, even my job. I'm workin for meetings, for
re-creating a Legio, for stablish a proper administration in
Hispania, and my feeling is that I'm not proud enough, because of my
failure by the moment on a Philosophy Course. But I have never
consider myself "better" than any other quirite. Maybe that is the
substantial difference, Senator, Honorable Maximus, and the rest list
of Titles you have. But is a pleasure to talk to you before taking my
train from my "Platform". Sure we'll get engaged in the future... ;-D

Vale bene,

L. Didius Geminus Sceptius

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] The Praetor Suffectus speaks
From:	Patricia Cassia <pcassia@novaroma.org>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:57:46 -0500

It seems the discussion on U.S. politics has wandered far off topic. If
you cannot relate what you are saying to NR or Roman history, would you
kindly take it offline?

Also, for the benefit of your fellow list members, please try to edit
quoted messages down to a couple of relevant lines, rather than quoting
the whole thread back at us.

-----
Patricia Cassia
Senatrix et Sacerdos Minervalis
Nova Roma . pcassia@novaroma.org

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Rome In The First Century
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:30:53 -0000

Salvete omnes,

I just got back yesterday. To my pleasant surprise my PBS Video -
Rome in the First Century AD arrived. Though some of you may have
seen it, I highly reccomend it. Well done, well written, beautiful
scenery with ancient Roman music being played in the background and
221 minutes long. The first century is my favourite period of Roman
history. It is a must for every NR's library. You can get it through
Amazon but it takes a little searching in their sub directories to
find it.

Regards - Quintus Lanius Paulinus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Average Citizens
From:	"Marcus Cassius Julianus <cassius622@aol.com>" <cassius622@aol.com>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:32:11 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:

> I am curious as to which higher standards senators hold
themselves. Are there a hidden set of virtues that only senators are
aware of, and that only apply to senators? I have heard rumor that
there are senators who are virtually inactive, what about them? Have
they relegated themselves to "average citizen" with a title, or are
they still of a higher standard?

Salve,

At present, there are only *two* Senators who have been 'virtually
inactive.' Both seemed to have undergone major life changes but never
took the step of removing themselves from the Senate.

To be honest Nova Roma had never planned to deal with such non-
participation. People enter the Senate specifically *because* they
have been active in Nova Roma. It was thought that people would
continue to be active once in the Senate, or they would quit of their
own choice. Instead we've run into a situation where two individuals
have gone inactive. When contacted they say "Yes, I still want to be
a Senator!" Yet after such contact they are still not heard from.

This last year, the Senate voted in a Consultum under which non-
participating Senators may be removed from their Senate seats if they
have not participated during a year. It is my belief that these two
Senators will be removed shortly if they do not return to their
duties.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] New Gens Member
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:38:01 -0000

Salvete omnes,

I see my Paterfamilias, Gaius Lanius Falco presented our new family
member, Helena Lania Valida while I was away. I have been
corresponding with her on the business of Rome for the last few
months and she is very nice, enthusiastic, wishing to learn all she
can about Rome. I echo Gaius' sentiments in welcoming her and I
guarenteed her she wouldn't be bored at all! Welcome Helena!

Regards - Quintus Lanius Paulinus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Mocassins
From:	jmath669642reng@webtv.net
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:49:24 -0500 (EST)

Master Sceptius;

Just a brief note. I often have the bad habit of using examples of
comments which citizens of other countries often wonder about. The
comment "walk a mile in my mocassins" has to do with a footwear that the
Indian peoples of North America wore during the early days of our
nation. The term refers to the caution that one should " experience the
tasks and responsibilities of another before criticizing or before
commenting in a critical way on them. I do not mean by that that you
have in any way done so, but rather only to provide a clearer
understanding of the "local saying."

I do not mean to support either individual in this discussion,
necessarily, but sometimes an explanation of a local saying will be
helpful in better understanding what points are being made in such a
discussion. My experience living in Spain for years has made me more
sensitive to such possibilities, and my own shortcomings, than the
average person.

All the best of good fortune to you in your Candidacy for Tribune.

Respectfully;

Marcus Mnucius Audens

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Devolved vs. Federal (WAS: Nationality and Nova Roma)
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=" <cordus@strategikon.org>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:55:08 +0000 (GMT)

A. Apollonius Cordus to Cn. Salix Astur, Vibius
Ambrosius Caesariensis and all citizens and
peregrines, greetings.

I hope that the Praetors will not consider this
off-topic, for although it arises from a comparison of
the constitutions of various other nations I believe
it has bearing on how we view our own.

Caesariensis wrote:

> I assumed that the present [Spanish} government had
> devolved substantial autonomy to Barcelona and
> Bilbao as regional capitals, thereby making it no
> longer a truly centralised nation.

To which Astur responded:

> What you say is, obviously, true. Spain is not a
> centralised nation. However, for some strange reason
> that is difficult to understand, Spaniards do not
> use the term 'federalism' when referring to their
> political system, even if it actually is pretty
> close to what most people understand as
> 'federalism'

First, let me make clear that I have no knowledge of
the Spanish constitution at all! But I have some
acquaintance with the constitution of the United
Kingdom, which has similar issues. The UK government
has recently 'devolved' certain powers upon the
Scottish Parliament and, to a lesser extent, the Weslh
Regional Assembly. This was done by an Act of
Parliament. If Caesariensis' use of the word
'devolved' is accurate, then this is presumably
similar to the situation he refers to in Spain.
However, this does not make the UK government at
Westminster (in London) a 'federal' government, for
the following technical reason:

A 'federal' constitution is one in which the
relationship between the central government and the
regional governments is regulated and proscribed by a
higher authority, usually the constitution itself.
Thus it would be illegal (contrary to the
constitution) for either side to try to use more power
than it is allowed.

However, if a central government 'devolved' power to a
regional one by its own authority, then it has the
authority (in legal theory at least) to take the power
back. So in the UK, the Parliament at Westminster
could, if it wished, simply revoke the Act which gave
the regional bodies their powers, and that would be
that. This is because the powers are given to the
regions not by a higher legal authority, but by the
authority of the government. (In the UK there is no
higher legal power than Parliament, except to some
extent now the EU.)

Of course in many cases a government which has
devolved power to a regional body would find it very
difficult in practice to take it away, especially if
it was devolved a long time ago, and so in this way a
system which is theoretically not federal can become
pseudo-federal in practice.

Now, let's have a look at Nova Roma to see which of
these categories we have. The Constitution says that
Governors have these rights (among others; this is
section V.c.1, by the way):

b. To proclaim those edicta (edicts) necessary to
engage in those tasks which advance the mission and
function of Nova Roma, solely within the jurisdiction
of their provincia (such edicts being binding upon
themselves as well as others);
c. To manage the day-to-day organization and
administration of their provincia;
d. To appoint legati (legates) to administer
sub-divisions of their province with all of the
authority of the governor and to remove the same as
they see fit;
e. To appoint scribae (clerks) to assist with
administrative and other tasks, as the governor shall
see fit.

So one could argue that these powers are genuinely
federal rather than devolved, since they are
constitutionally guaranteed. However, since provinces
are created and governors appointed by Senatus
Consulta, we must assume that the Senate could
contrarywise issue a Senatus Consultum abolishing a
province or deposing the governor. This strongly
suggests to me that the system we currently operate is
a devolved system rather than a federal one.

This is a reasonably accurate reflection of the way
the ancient provincial system worked (it certainly
wasn't federal), though in that system there was some
room for the popular assemblies as well as the Senate
to intervene in provincial affairs.

I would be interested to hear people's views on
whether this ought to be the case, or whether a
federal state of Nova Roma would be more desirable - I
myself haven't yet come down on one side or the other.

Cordus

=====

www.strategikon.org

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Rome In The First Century
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:03:13 -0600 (CST)

Salve Quinte Lani,

> I just got back yesterday. To my pleasant surprise my PBS Video -
> Rome in the First Century AD arrived.

Is that the exact title? I tried searching for ROME FIRST CENTURY on
Amazon, but got nothing.

If we can get an exact URL, it can be reposted here with our affiliate
ID in it, and we will get a small payment from Amazon for each sale
made from that link.

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Censor-Elect 2756

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Rome In The First Century - Correction
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:22:24 -0000

Salve Marce,

Forgive me. I'm a little hung over this morning. The Correct title
is "The Roman Empire In The First Century" - PBS Goldbar and Koval
Productions. I got mine at Amazon.Ca ca = Canada. Also you can get
it at PBS.org but I think Amazon is a little cheaper. Let me know how
you make out. You'll like it. They concentrate a fair bit on Augustus
and credit him with Rome's revival.

Quintus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Rome In The First Century - Correction
From:	Marcus Octavius Germanicus <haase@konoko.net>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 10:35:52 -0600 (CST)

Salve Quinte Lani,

Here it is:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005NI7G/novaroma00A/

Vale, Octavius.

--
Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
Censor-Elect 2756

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Mocassins
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:37:39 -0000

Salvete Senator Audens,

I am often working in Northern Canada on remote locations. Sometimes
I am away for a few months at a time. Now the camps do have women
cooking their and they often ware mocassin type footware in the
buildings. We use them to guage our fatigue. The rule of thumb is
that when mocassins start to look like high heels, it is time to ship
out!

Regards - Quintus Lanius Paulinus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Devolved vs. Federal
From:	"L. Sicinius Drusus" <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:39:23 -0800 (PST)

The current system isn't federal, nor was the Roman
system. The only thing our Provinces share with
provinces in a Federal state are the name. Roman
Provinces are administrative districts not areas with
local powers. Propraetors and Proconsuls serve as
representaves of the Senate to the Province, not as
Representives of the citizens of the province. To a
degree they represent the province by reporting on
local conditions to the Senate, but this isn't thier
primary duty.

In Antiquita the government that mattered the most the
people living in the provinces was the government of
thier city. They had varrying degrees of control over
this government depending on local customs which could
be modified at the descretion of the Propraetor or
Proconsul. The cities had the right to appeal these
decessions by pettioning the Senate, though the Senate
normally sided with the Propraetor.

A Province was no more than an administrative district
that contained the Cities that a Propraetor or a
Proconsul worked with, and I feel that we should
retain this type of organization for Nova Roma.

There have been several proposals to start setting up
these local governments within a Provincia, but so far
the efforts haven't gone beyond sugestions of how this
might be handled.

--- "A. Apollonius Cordus" <cordus@strategikon.org>
SNIP
>
> Now, let's have a look at Nova Roma to see which of
> these categories we have. The Constitution says that
> Governors have these rights (among others; this is
> section V.c.1, by the way):
>
> b. To proclaim those edicta (edicts) necessary to
> engage in those tasks which advance the mission and
> function of Nova Roma, solely within the
> jurisdiction
> of their provincia (such edicts being binding upon
> themselves as well as others);
> c. To manage the day-to-day organization and
> administration of their provincia;
> d. To appoint legati (legates) to administer
> sub-divisions of their province with all of the
> authority of the governor and to remove the same as
> they see fit;
> e. To appoint scribae (clerks) to assist with
> administrative and other tasks, as the governor
> shall
> see fit.
>
> So one could argue that these powers are genuinely
> federal rather than devolved, since they are
> constitutionally guaranteed. However, since
> provinces
> are created and governors appointed by Senatus
> Consulta, we must assume that the Senate could
> contrarywise issue a Senatus Consultum abolishing a
> province or deposing the governor. This strongly
> suggests to me that the system we currently operate
> is
> a devolved system rather than a federal one.
>
> This is a reasonably accurate reflection of the way
> the ancient provincial system worked (it certainly
> wasn't federal), though in that system there was
> some
> room for the popular assemblies as well as the
> Senate
> to intervene in provincial affairs.
>
> I would be interested to hear people's views on
> whether this ought to be the case, or whether a
> federal state of Nova Roma would be more desirable -
> I
> myself haven't yet come down on one side or the
> other.
>
> Cordus
>
> =====
>
>
> www.strategikon.org
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
>

=====
L. Sicinius Drusus

Roman Citizen

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Rome In The First Century - Correction
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 16:39:50 -0000

Thank you Marcus. Enjoy!

Quintus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Marcus Octavius Germanicus
<haase@c...> wrote:
> Salve Quinte Lani,
>
> Here it is:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005NI7G/novaroma00A/
>
> Vale, Octavius.
>
>
> --
> Marcus Octavius Germanicus, Consul of Nova Roma
> Censor-Elect 2756

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] DOMINI FACTIONES: last day
From:	"Franciscus Apulus Caesar" <sacro_barese_impero@libero.it>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:04:58 +0100

Franciscus Apulus CAesar Omnibus S.P.D.

I remember you all that today is the last day to vote your Dominus
Factionum.
The Domini are the caput of the Factiones, the coloured team in Ludi
Circenses (the virtual charriot races). They'll manage the activities of the
team, promote the Ludi, organize trainings, manage the websites.

You can vote to 00.00 (time of Rome) of today sending a message to
sacro_barese_impero@libero.it

The candidates are the following:

Dominus Factionis Veneta: Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
(Candidate announced himself)

Dominus Factionis Russata: Tiberius Apollonius Cicatrix
(Candidate announced himself)

Dominus Factionis Albatae: Marcus Octavius Solaris
(Candidate announced himself)

Dominus Factionis Praesina:
(no Candidate announced himself/herself)

Valete bene
Franciscus Apulus Caesar
-------------------------------------------
Senior Curule Aedile for year 2756
Propraetor Provinciae Italiae
Quaestor Aedilis C. Fabius Quintilianus
Scriba Curatoris Araneum
-------------------------------------------
Provincia Italia - http://italia.novaroma.org
Paterfamilias Gens Apula - www.gensapula.too.it
Cohors Aedilis C. Fabius Quintilianus -
http://italia.novaroma.org/cohorsaedilis
Academia Italica - http://italia.novaroma.org/academiaitalica
Yahoo Messanger: fapulus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Withdrawal - re Manifest Destiny
From:	"Chantal G. Whittington" <aerdensrw@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:28:16 -0800 (PST)

Heh...I hope we're not going to get into a debate over
manifest destiny. I think that's one of the most
arrogant concepts anyone dver came up with.

---
Renata Corva

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Average Citizens
From:	Centurion M Bianchius Antonius <imperialreign@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 11:28:38 -0800 (PST)

Salve, I wish to thank you for this information. It has been bugging me for awhile now that we have inactive senators. I feel that it cheapens the Senate to have votes and always have the same two names listed at the bottom as not voting.

As to the bit where they were asked if they wanted to be senators....who is going to say no? Nutting question in the first place.

Take care,

Marcus Bianchius Antonius

Salve,

At present, there are only *two* Senators who have been 'virtually
inactive.' Both seemed to have undergone major life changes but never
took the step of removing themselves from the Senate.

To be honest Nova Roma had never planned to deal with such non-
participation. People enter the Senate specifically *because* they
have been active in Nova Roma. It was thought that people would
continue to be active once in the Senate, or they would quit of their
own choice. Instead we've run into a situation where two individuals
have gone inactive. When contacted they say "Yes, I still want to be
a Senator!" Yet after such contact they are still not heard from.

This last year, the Senate voted in a Consultum under which non-
participating Senators may be removed from their Senate seats if they
have not participated during a year. It is my belief that these two
Senators will be removed shortly if they do not return to their
duties.

Valete,

Marcus Cassius Julianus


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Announcement of Candidacy: Curio for Aedilis Plebis
From:	"curiobritannicus <Marcusaemiliusscaurus@hotmail.com>" <Marcusaemiliusscaurus@hotmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:34:43 -0000

Salvete,

My thanks also for the correction, Fortunatus.

> Sorry if I caused a ruckus, now I'll be quiet. :)

No need, Pius, no need! You had the courage to stand forward and
state your viewpoint - you'll notice I just said timidly that our law
experts might know better, hehe...

Bene valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Nova!
From:	"T.Junius Romanus <titan_242002@yahoo.com>" <titan_242002@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:12:30 -0000

Ave!Everyone I am Junius,I am new to this group and would like to say
hello to everyone. Junius

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Nova!
From:	"aerdensrw <aerdensrw@yahoo.com>" <aerdensrw@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:01:57 -0000

Greetings, Junius, and welcome to Nova Roma! It's good to have you
with us. :)

Vale,

Renata Corva
Scriba Praetoris
Rogatrix-elect

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Nova!
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:04:00 -0500

Salve T. Junius Romanus and welcome to Nova Roma I hope you life here among your fellow Romans is a long and fruitful one.

Vale,

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
Curator Differium-Elect ( newsletter editor)
Fortuna Favet Fortibus
----- Original Message -----
From: T.Junius Romanus
Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 3:00 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Nova!

Ave!Everyone I am Junius,I am new to this group and would like to say
hello to everyone. Junius

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	RES: [Nova-Roma] Nova!
From:	"Titus Arminius Genialis" <tagenialis@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:14:13 -0200

Salve, Junii.
Be welcome and have fun!

Vale,

______________________________________________
Titus Arminius Genialis
Apparitor Salutis Publicae Templi Concordiae

tagenialis@yahoo.com.br
http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/tagenialis
ICQ#: 75873373
______________________________________________

-----Mensagem original-----
De: T.Junius Romanus <titan_242002@yahoo.com>
[mailto:titan_242002@yahoo.com]
Enviada em: domingo, 8 de dezembro de 2002 14:13
Para: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Assunto: [Nova-Roma] Nova!

Ave!Everyone I am Junius,I am new to this group and would like to say
hello to everyone. Junius

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Mensagem enviada está livre de vírus.
Enviada por GNBS através do MSO2K.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.422 / Virus Database: 237 - Release Date: 20/11/2002

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Mocassins
From:	"sceptia <sceptia@yahoo.es>" <sceptia@yahoo.es>
Date:	Sun, 08 Dec 2002 20:18:12 -0000

Honorable Audens;

Thanks for your quotation, even I knew it before. I do understand
it, and aprecciate your kind and wise advice. :-)
When talking with Maximus that point seems to be clarified to me as
far as his experience or any other one can be approached just by
being silent for a while, breath quietly and then asking if any
doubt or stating if necessary. :-)
In Spain we use to say "Hasta que no uses sus zapatos y veas donde
aprietan, no sabrás porqué cojea". I would like to translate it, but
is the very same idea. :-)

Vale bene,

L. Didius Geminus Sceptius

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, jmath669642reng@w... wrote:
> Master Sceptius;
>
> Just a brief note. I often have the bad habit of using examples of
> comments which citizens of other countries often wonder about. The
> comment "walk a mile in my mocassins" has to do with a footwear
that the
> Indian peoples of North America wore during the early days of our
> nation. The term refers to the caution that one should "
experience the
> tasks and responsibilities of another before criticizing or before
> commenting in a critical way on them. I do not mean by that that
you
> have in any way done so, but rather only to provide a clearer
> understanding of the "local saying."
>
> I do not mean to support either individual in this discussion,
> necessarily, but sometimes an explanation of a local saying will be
> helpful in better understanding what points are being made in such
a
> discussion. My experience living in Spain for years has made me
more
> sensitive to such possibilities, and my own shortcomings, than the
> average person.
>
> All the best of good fortune to you in your Candidacy for Tribune.
>
> Respectfully;
>
> Marcus Mnucius Audens
>
> Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
>
>
> http://community.webtv.net/jmath669642reng/NovaRomaMilitary

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	RE: [Nova-Roma] Citizens and Senators
From:	"Diana Moravia Aventina" <diana@pandora.be>
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:23:52 +0100

Salve,

Q Fabius Maximus said:
I have to wonder why you are baiting me on the main list, since I'm not
standing for any magistracy.

I have to agree with Maximus on this!

Vale,
Diana Aventina

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Nationality and Nova Roma (Was: Re: Withdrawl)
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:55:40 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : =?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@yahoo.es>
>
>Spaniards do not use the term “federalism“ when referring to their
>political system, even if it actually is pretty close to what most
>people understand as “federalism“ (you know; European funny mental and
>linguistic quirks, like British “public schools“ ;-) ).
>
I begin to see the picture: as in 'Federal' to British Conservatives means 'centralised loss of autonomy' when it refers to Brussels overseeing them and 'unnecessary levels of political interference' when applied to local administrations they cannot control :)
Caesariensis.

--
Personalised email by http://another.com

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Devolved vs. Federal (WAS: Nationality and Nova Roma)
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:22:27 +0000 (GMT)

I wansn't concerned about NR itself being federal as much as that a similarity could be drawn between allegience to micronations as well as macro and federated macronations, the USA being one of the more locally independent examples. So I thought it strange than an American should worry about conflict of interest. In practice, I see this only as something the kind of state would worry about that regrets it has no way to determine just what its citizens dream about.

Caesariensis.

-----Original Message-----
>From : “=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=“ <cordus@strategikon.org>
To : Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Date : 08 December 2002 15:55:08
Subject : [Nova-Roma] Devolved vs. Federal (WAS: Nationality and Nova Roma)
A. Apollonius Cordus to Cn. Salix Astur, Vibius
>Ambrosius Caesariensis and all citizens and
>peregrines, greetings.

--
Personalised email by http://another.com

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Devolved vs. Federal
From:	me-in-@disguise.co.uk
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 22:24:27 +0000 (GMT)

-----Original Message-----
>From : “L. Sicinius Drusus“ <lsicinius@yahoo.com>
>
>In Antiquita the government that mattered the most the
>people living in the provinces was the government of
>thier city. They had varrying degrees of control over
>this government depending on local customs which could
>be modified at the descretion of the Propraetor or
>
Doesn't that amount to a federation of cities?

Caesariensis.

--
Personalised email by http://another.com

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Inactive Senators and Augurs
From:	AthanasiosofSpfd@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:59:46 EST

In a message dated 12/8/2002 10:33:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cassius622@aol.com writes:

> To be honest Nova Roma had never planned to deal with such non-
> participation. People enter the Senate specifically *because* they
> have been active in Nova Roma. It was thought that people would
> continue to be active once in the Senate, or they would quit of their
> own choice. Instead we've run into a situation where two individuals
> have gone inactive. When contacted they say "Yes, I still want to be
> a Senator!" Yet after such contact they are still not heard from.

Salve Cassius:

The issue of inactive senators is something that, to me, is a stain upon Nova
Roma. It is no good to have citizens in leadership positions who do not
fulfill the minimum standards of their office.

I also think it is "insane" to have people occupying priesthood positions
that have left Nova Roma altogether. For example...Augurs are "for life."
Yet we have several augurs who are not even citizens anymore, yet they remain
as augurs "officially." How do we (being those who wish to remain citizens)
even know that these inactive (yet official) augurs are even still alive.

I know that Senators and Augurs were positions "for life," but if we have
broken from tradition on several other points of Roman life, surely there can
be some sort of "activity" clause to keep some sort of minimum standard of
activity. I think as long as someone is doing the job then their post as
senator or augur etc... should be guarded, but prolonged inactivity or
cancellation of membership (in the case of Augurs) should result in the loss
of the post...at least in my opinion.

Inactivity hurts our Republic, especially with the augurs, as there are only
so many augurs that can fill up that particular Collegium -- and there are
only so many slots for Patricians and Plebeians.

It is a sad state of affairs -- in my opinion -- when we have senators,
magistrates, pontiffs, augurs, etc... who are either inactive or who have not
paid their taxes.

Ok...my rant is completed <G>. Sorry if I have offended anyone.

Vale;

G. Modius Athanasius

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Mocassins
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@yahoo.es>
Date:	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:21:20 +0100 (CET)

Salvete Quirites; et salve, senator Audens.

--- jmath669642reng@webtv.net escribió:
> Master Sceptius;
>
> Just a brief note. I often have the bad habit of using examples of
> comments which citizens of other countries often wonder about. The
> comment "walk a mile in my mocassins" has to do with a footwear that
> the Indian peoples of North America wore during the early days of our
> nation. The term refers to the caution that one should " experience
> the tasks and responsibilities of another before criticizing or
> before commenting in a critical way on them. I do not mean by that
> that you have in any way done so, but rather only to provide a
> clearer understanding of the "local saying."

A very kind gesture, if I may say so. It is always convenient to
remember that we all are talking with people of different cultural
backgrounds, and that means that it is sometimes difficult for others
to understand what we are actually trying to say.

Thank you very much, senator, for thinking about this :-).

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Tribunus Plebis
Triumvir Academiae Thules
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules
Lictor Curiatus.

___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sorteos
Consulta si tu número ha sido premiado en
Yahoo! Sorteos http://loteria.yahoo.es

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Citizens and Senators
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:34:29 EST

In a message dated 12/8/02 3:23:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, sceptia@yahoo.es
writes:

L. Didius Geminus Sceptius

> SCE: You can remember, not the Hades but your latest questions about
> our posture on Gens Reform, on certain Lex passed... memory can't be
> so bad, Honorable Maximus. :-)
>

That was not me, that was Sinicus. But I know your posture on the Gens
reform lex.
And you are entitled to your opinion.

>
> SCE: So you recognize a Clientelar System. Oh, good. :-)
> That means, for example, that if one day I wish to leave my Gens
> because I disagree my paterfamilias ideas and he fail on that I can
> go?.
>

Well you can go now. :-) The Censors' edictum overturned that
interpretation of Paterpotestas in the constitution.

>
> SCE: A couple of questions, maybe I'm not aware... what the SCA is?
> what do you mean by a vet fighter?. :-)
>

Your English is so good I thought you were an American. I apologize :-)
The SCA is an organization of people dedicated to understanding the early and
late medieval period. They dress up in medieval dress. They celebrate
medieval traditional holidays.
The big excuse for this organization in my view, is for the men to fight each
other using rattan weapons and metal armor for protection. I was an off and
on member for 20 years. I fought sword and shield when time allowed. I had
several "squires" boys who would tend my armor pitch my tent etc. In return
I would spar with them, teach fighting technique, instruct them in history.
Vet means Veteran.

> SCE: Do you think so? First of all, I'm not using that as a platform,
> is just a personal view on you. I can be wrong, I can be right (As
> far as we communicate by i-net, a pity-Would like to know personally
> all of you americans, including Gens Cornelia, so full os citizens
> and the proud of NR :-)-) but I never thought of using it as
> a "platform" for no train. Things are easier than that. :-)
>

Well, forgive my skepticism. An American trait of mine when it comes to
politics.
Talking to me makes you very visible on the main list. If I mistook your
questioning for political advantage, that's my fault. Platform BTW means
what your political solutions are going to be so the people will elect you.

>
> SCE: Sure I did not walked on your moccasins, but I have tried.
> Because not being a Consular Magistrate I can figure myself and
> picture what could it be, and I read the List, and... so I can figure
> a little what can it be.
>
True, but you really can't.

>
> SCE: Honorable Maximus, I just replied above but I should add
> something.
> You are as visible as you want. A Senator, a Pontifex, any office,
> any citizen, can be as visible as he/she wants to be. Is not a
> problem of the office but of the personal wish to get involved. So I
> ask again before the next paragraph, why you believe you have to have
> higher virtues than a citizen and then feel yourself superior to a
> citizen because of those higher standards?. A quirite can be as much
> virtuous as you are (I do not talk of myself, I'm a Skeptic :-D) but
> is not the Office, but the individual.
>

And I told you have been here for five years and was involved in political
change from the start. I also served an accenus for Aediles, Praetors, and a
Consul when I started out for my first year and 1/2. So I for me NR is a
second home. I want to see it succeed.

> > Finally, what do the people themselves feel about this consulta?
> Remember we > the Senate just advise the Consuls, but they usually
> take our advice. > How many privatis have to worry about that? There
> are good people here, I > have no doubt, that are devoted and staunch
> practicers of the virtues and > Religio, and they serve Nova Roma in
> their own way, but it becomes more > heightened when you get your
> seat.
>
> SCE: Again, Honorable Maximus, the seat is a good place to sit and
> vote, but is the individual who makes the work, not the office.
>
Ah but a disagree with you. The seat inspires you to do better.
>
> SCE: Yes, is a half answer but fairly enough. It is important the
> spoken as much as the not said.
> I have served to Nova Rome for just 1 year and 1/2, but I get
> involved even when my mater dead in june of the present year, even
> now my father is not well, even my job. I'm working for meetings, for
> re-creating a Legio, to establish a proper administration in
> Hispania, and my feeling is that I'm not proud enough, because of my
> failure by the moment on a Philosophy Course. But I have never
> consider myself "better" than any other quirite. Maybe that is the
> substantial difference, Senator, Honorable Maximus, and the rest list
> of Titles you have. But is a pleasure to talk to you before taking my
> train from my "Platform". Sure we'll get engaged in the future... ;-D
>

"Be" engaged I don't plan to marry you :-)

My father died while I was Consul, and my sister was in terrible auto
accident.
My Co Consul will tell you I never missed a meeting or a vote during those
trying times. It is all part of the office and commitment as my gensmate is
about to find out.

Q. Fabius Maximus

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Devolved vs. Federal (WAS: Nationality and Nova Roma)
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?Gnaeus=20Salix=20Astur?= <salixastur@yahoo.es>
Date:	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:44:02 +0100 (CET)

Salvete Quirites; et salve, Apolloni Corde.

--- "A. Apollonius Cordus" <cordus@strategikon.org> escribió:
> A. Apollonius Cordus to Cn. Salix Astur, Vibius
> Ambrosius Caesariensis and all citizens and peregrines, greetings.
>
> I hope that the Praetors will not consider this
> off-topic, for although it arises from a comparison of
> the constitutions of various other nations I believe
> it has bearing on how we view our own.

I also have to beg for the praetores' pardon, since I am going to reply
to this very same e-mail :-). I think that this can help us to know a
little more about each other, and that is always a Pretty Good Thing.
And we are discussing political theory, which is slightly "on topic"
here in Nova Roma, in my humble opinion. If someone is not interested
in this topic (a normal and commendable attitude), I would like to
invite them with all respect to erase this message right now :-).

<<snipped>>

> > What you say is, obviously, true. Spain is not a
> > centralised nation. However, for some strange reason
> > that is difficult to understand, Spaniards do not
> > use the term 'federalism' when referring to their
> > political system, even if it actually is pretty
> > close to what most people understand as
> > 'federalism'
>
> First, let me make clear that I have no knowledge of
> the Spanish constitution at all! But I have some
> acquaintance with the constitution of the United
> Kingdom, which has similar issues. The UK government
> has recently 'devolved' certain powers upon the
> Scottish Parliament and, to a lesser extent, the Weslh
> Regional Assembly. This was done by an Act of
> Parliament. If Caesariensis' use of the word
> 'devolved' is accurate, then this is presumably
> similar to the situation he refers to in Spain.
> However, this does not make the UK government at
> Westminster (in London) a 'federal' government, for
> the following technical reason:
>
> A 'federal' constitution is one in which the
> relationship between the central government and the
> regional governments is regulated and proscribed by a
> higher authority, usually the constitution itself.
> Thus it would be illegal (contrary to the
> constitution) for either side to try to use more power
> than it is allowed.
>
> However, if a central government 'devolved' power to a
> regional one by its own authority, then it has the
> authority (in legal theory at least) to take the power
> back. So in the UK, the Parliament at Westminster
> could, if it wished, simply revoke the Act which gave
> the regional bodies their powers, and that would be
> that. This is because the powers are given to the
> regions not by a higher legal authority, but by the
> authority of the government. (In the UK there is no
> higher legal power than Parliament, except to some
> extent now the EU.)
>
> Of course in many cases a government which has
> devolved power to a regional body would find it very
> difficult in practice to take it away, especially if
> it was devolved a long time ago, and so in this way a
> system which is theoretically not federal can become
> pseudo-federal in practice.

As for the Spanish political system, I have to admit that Spain does
have a Constitution that defines the power to regional governments, so
it would fall within your definition of "federalism" above (not that
you should have known it, of course) :-).

> Now, let's have a look at Nova Roma to see which of
> these categories we have. The Constitution says that
> Governors have these rights (among others; this is
> section V.c.1, by the way):
>
> b. To proclaim those edicta (edicts) necessary to
> engage in those tasks which advance the mission and
> function of Nova Roma, solely within the jurisdiction
> of their provincia (such edicts being binding upon
> themselves as well as others);
> c. To manage the day-to-day organization and
> administration of their provincia;
> d. To appoint legati (legates) to administer
> sub-divisions of their province with all of the
> authority of the governor and to remove the same as
> they see fit;
> e. To appoint scribae (clerks) to assist with
> administrative and other tasks, as the governor shall
> see fit.
>
> So one could argue that these powers are genuinely
> federal rather than devolved, since they are
> constitutionally guaranteed. However, since provinces
> are created and governors appointed by Senatus
> Consulta, we must assume that the Senate could
> contrarywise issue a Senatus Consultum abolishing a
> province or deposing the governor. This strongly
> suggests to me that the system we currently operate is
> a devolved system rather than a federal one.
>
> This is a reasonably accurate reflection of the way
> the ancient provincial system worked (it certainly
> wasn't federal), though in that system there was some
> room for the popular assemblies as well as the Senate
> to intervene in provincial affairs.
>
> I would be interested to hear people's views on
> whether this ought to be the case, or whether a
> federal state of Nova Roma would be more desirable - I
> myself haven't yet come down on one side or the other.

I personally think that our provincial administrations should be
strongly encouraged. I do like some aspects of our current system,
because it follows the historical Roman model quite accurately (and it
was a pretty good model, given that it ruled over a huge dominion for
many, many centuries), although I would also like to see additional
provincial structures besides the propraetorship.

I think we could certainly improve things a little bit, perhaps through
the creation of local "chapters", thus giving Nova Roma the benefits of
local (and thus less net-based) administration. Some proposals on these
"civitates" have been made in the past, but so far they have not had
too much success. I think that this is an idea whose time has finally
come.

I guess that we all agree in that local administrations can help us to
achieve Nova Roma's objectives. In my own province, Hispania, we have
worked quite a lot on this aspect, and I can say that the results are
certainly worth the effort (I have just returned from our third
provincial meeting, which has been a complete success). Let's see if we
can move further in this direction on a national (all Nova Roma) level
during next year.

=====
Bene Valete in Pace Deorum!
Gnaeus Salix Astur.
Tribunus Plebis
Triumvir Academiae Thules
Scriba ad Res Externas Academiae Thules
Lictor Curiatus.

___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sorteos
Consulta si tu número ha sido premiado en
Yahoo! Sorteos http://loteria.yahoo.es

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Average Citizens
From:	qfabiusmaxmi@aol.com
Date:	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:54:42 EST

In a message dated 12/8/02 11:29:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,
imperialreign@yahoo.com writes:

> As to the bit where they were asked if they wanted to be senators....who is
> going to say no? Nutting question in the first place.
>

Actually you are unaware of some facts. Originally the founder wanted the
Senate to be a lifetime appointment. It was an award for exceptional service
to NR. One Senator appointed during the dictator's term was under age. So
he had no business in the Senate in the first place. However he mislead the
Censors on his application. The second is in grad school and has been busy.
However early this year the second founder decided on this service standard.
Having two inactive Senators does not hurt the Senate. In the Old Roman
Senate up to 50% of Senators often were nonvoting. Heck, Iulius Caesar was
absent for two years while he studied rhetoric. We have inactive citizens,
in NR why not inactive Senators? Another example of poor law making with an
antagonistic agenda in mind.

Valete
Q. Fabius Maximus

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

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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