Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Edictum Consulare CFQ VII de Comitiorum Populi Tributorum Convocatione
From:	"quintuscassiuscalvus" <richmal@attbi.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 00:40:14 -0000

Salve Honorable Consul,

Thank you for your clear and concise answers to my questions.

Just a couple things:

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
<christer.edling@t...> wrote:
> Salve Honorable Lucius Modius Rufus!
>

Cut and paste can be a problem can't it. <G> LOL! Don't worry, to
err is human and thanks to the internet you can share it with several
hundred of your closest strangers. <G>

>
> No problem and I appreciate to talk with You about my law
proposals,
> I hope that we can make this a habit to discuss the laws that I
will
> propose the following months. ;-)
>
> >Vale,
> >
> >Q. Cassius Calvus

It would be a pleasure, but remember I can be a feisty disagreeable
old cuss sometimes.

Vale,

Q. Cassius Calvus

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Laenas appointment as 5th tribune of Nova Roma
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?q?A.=20Apollonius=20Cordus?=" <cordus@strategikon.org>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 01:51:28 +0100 (BST)

A. Apollonius Cordus to Senator L. Sinicius Drusus and
all citizens and peregrines, greetings.

You wrote:

> A Majority of Senators
> present has to vote for an item for it to pass.
>
> At Least 14 Senators have to be present for a
quorum.
> If this minium number is present then the required
> majority would be 8 Senators. Since there are only 7
> Plebian Senators it is numericly impossible to pass
a
> measure with only Plebian Senators voting at the
> present time.

I don't wish to pry, but this strikes me as odd - in
my experience it's usually the case in meetings of
committees or similar bodies that items can be passed
if a majority of those who vote one way or the other
(i.e. everyone except those who abstain) votes in
favour. Otherwise, abstaining is in fact identical to
voting 'no', is it not?

I wonder whether you or another Senator could ease my
puzzlement by explaining why the Senate operates in
this way - is it a historical issue?

Many thanks,

Cordus

=====


www.strategikon.org


__________________________________________________
It's Samaritans' Week. Help Samaritans help others.
Call 08709 000032 to give or donate online now at http://www.samaritans.org/support/donations.shtm

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Upcoming senate meeting
From:	"Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa" <vipsaniusagrippa@hotmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 May 2003 21:57:19 -0600

Salvete

I was wondering if the affiliation application by Legio XXI Rapax out of
Calgary, Alberta, Canada was on the Senate`s agenda for the next meeting.
They sent in the application about ten days ago so it should have been
recieved by someone. Senator Quintus Fabius Maximus stated in the Sodalitas
Militarium list that the Senate has to approve all affiliations so I just
wanted to see if things were proceeding in any way.

Thank you for your time,
Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa

_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Upcoming senate meeting
From:	Fortunatus <labienus@novaroma.org>
Date:	Wed, 21 May 2003 23:04:27 -0500

Salve Gai Vipsani

> I was wondering if the affiliation application by Legio XXI Rapax out of
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada was on the Senate`s agenda for the next meeting.

I've received the application. As it was sent to consuls@novaroma.org,
my collega has likely seen it as well. I'll be convening the Senate
next month, and I intend to put it on the agenda if he doesn't beat me
to it.

Vale
T Labienus Fortunatus
--
May pre house the seamy side volitation!!!

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Roman Aquileia
From:	=?iso-8859-1?B?R6VJVkxJVlOlU0NBVlJWUw==?= <gfr@intcon.net>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 04:32:09 -0000

G. Iulius Scaurus S.P.D.

Avete, Quirites.

Here's a link to the official website of Aquileia:

http://www.aquileia.it/

The site includes considerable historical and archaeological
information -- images from the archaeological museum and various
excavation sites, mosaics, the Roman basilica, and VRML exhibits of
Roman artifacts -- as well as tourist information.

Valete, Quirites.

G. Iulius Scaurus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Qui dies hodie est?
From:	"iris serva" <iris_serva@hotmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 08:52:11 +0000

Sodales avete!

"today is ante diem XI Kal. IVNIAS MMDCCLVI" (Nova Roma Calendar)
"today is ante diem septum Idus Maias"
(http://perso.wanadoo.fr/renaud.fortuner/)

"The difference between the Julian calendar and our (Gregorian) calendar is
currently 13 days (our March 13, 1900 was exactly February 29 in the Julian
calendar). This explains the 13 day difference between today date given
according to the Julian calendar and the usual Gregorian date".

Mecastor!!!! Please, help me...I want to know what day is it!!!
Salvete
Drusilla Lania Iris

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Search, le moteur de recherche qui pense comme vous !
http://search.msn.fr/worldwide.asp

Subject:	=?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:[Nova-Roma]_Roman_Books?=
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?Q?sa-mann@libero.it?=" <sa-mann@libero.it>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 14:04:25 +0200

> Salve I would like to include this in the June Eagle. Please send your answers directly to me at spqr753@msn.com
>
>
> What are the top ten books one must have in your Roman Library?
>
>
Here they are:

I- Aeneis

II- Saturnalia (Macrobius)

III-Revolt against the modern world (Julius Evola): available in the USA too!

IIII- Livius

V- De origine ac situ Germanorum (Tacitus) : german pride!

VI- La religione dei Romani ( Renato del Ponte): sorry, Italian only.

VII- De Reditu suo (Rutilius Namatianus)

VIII- De nuptiis philologiae et Mercurii (Martianus Capella)

VIII- De agricoltura (Cato)

X- Valerius Maximus.

Reverenter

Gallus Solaris Alexander

Bononia

Italia

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Edictum Consulare CFQ VII de Comitiorum Populi Tributorum Convocatione
From:	"jachthondus" <rompy@xs4all.nl>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 14:06:05 -0000

Hello Nova-Roma-People,

May I be so free as to ask a humble-question again?

You are discussing about "inactive-citizens", who'll have to
be "activated", and about "paying-taxes"?...

Letting pass this message through my little-brain:

1)So far I never have been an "inactive citizen"; (on the contrary)...
2)What does this "paying-taxes" mean? Is that in REAL-money? And for
WHAT?

With Kindest Regards,

Jachthondus.







--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:
>
> Salve Romans
>
> What about this as a suggestion ?
>
> Within each province we form a "mail tree" or, if phone numbers are
> available, a "phone tree"
>
> Each Nova Roma Governor (27 provinces) is given a list of the
inactive
> citizens ( anywhere between 1 and 1773) in their province and a
list of NR
> officials( a NR official is anybody with a title behind their name
and a
> willingness to donate the cost of 10-20 phone calls or postage
stamps) in
> the province (most governors already know who lives in their
province).
>
> The governors divide the lists between the officials in the
province and
> mail the lists to the officials, who in turn call or write to those
on their
> list. All information is then sent back to the Censors or to the
governors
> (or both) and the Censors take it from there.
>
> BTW what are we asking in the census? This is our first and best
chance to
> really get a good profile of our Citizens and I would hate for us
to miss
> out because we forgot to ask something important.
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
> Citizen
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Decimus Iunius Silanus" <danedwardsuk@y...>
> To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 7:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Edictum Consulare CFQ VII de Comitiorum
Populi
> Tributorum Convocatione
>
>
> > Salve Consul,
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to reply to my query -
> > it is much appreciated. Further, I agree with much of
> > what you say and applaud you efforts to make the
> > conducting of the census a cheaper affair than it
> > would otherwise have been.
> >
> > I must say, however, that I think that this census
> > provides us with an opportunity that we may miss. At
> > the end of the bulk email phase of the process, we
> > will be provided with a clear picture of exactly how
> > much it will cost to proceed with the snail mail phase
> > of the census. There should be provision within the
> > census to allow us to stop and take stock at this
> > stage and make a decision as to whether it will be too
> > cost prohibitive to continue. It seems folly to go in
> > 'full steam ahead' without knowing exactly how much
> > this census will cost. The truth is, we do not know
> > exactly how many individuals we may need to contact by
> > post, and as a consequence we should remain on the
> > side of prudence and caution.
> >
> > By way of a worst case scenario, a figure of around
> > 400 active citizens is often mentioned which leaves
> > 1300 potentially inactive citizens to contact by snail
> > mail (unlikely I know, but possible). This will result
> > in a snail mail exercise costing in the region of £650
> > or nearly $1000. Even your own estimation of 35%
> > results in the necessity to contact a little over 600
> > people by snail mail (cost £300 or nearly $500). None
> > of these figure take into account the man hours
> > involved. This is money that can be better spent in my
> > opinion. All I'm asking is that we phase the entire
> > process so that we may stop at any stage should it be
> > deemed sensible to do so. It will be far easier to
> > halt the process if there is provision within the
> > census that specifically permits it.
> >
> > Vale
> >
> > Decimus Iunius Silanus.
> >
> >
> > > The old Census law was much more expense and
> > > expected the Censors to
> > > build a staff of Censorial scribae internationally
> > > and it also
> > > expected the Censors to do the same expansive
> > > contacting within the
> > > Provinciae without the Governors and their
> > > assistants. I have changed
> > > this in this law as I think these changes will make
> > > the system
> > > cheaper. I also think it is much better to use the
> > > already built up
> > > structures in the Provincae.
> > >
> > > Still I think it will be hard to avoid that the
> > > _first_ Census will
> > > cost more than those that will follow. But laws are
> > > written for the
> > > long run and I think that this law will be
> > > affordable both the first
> > > time and in the future.
> > >
> > > Before we calculate the % of the inactive citizens
> > > that will not
> > > answer contacts by e-mail I think that we will have
> > > to consider a
> > > "special" group among these citizens - those who
> > > have friends among
> > > the officials of the Provinciae. These wouldn't be
> > > of much use with
> > > the old law, but when those who execute the Census
> > > are mainly from
> > > the Provinciae there will be a certain number that
> > > is known by the
> > > officials of the Provinciae. Those citizens will
> > > probably not cost
> > > anything to get in touch with, we could even expect
> > > some of them to
> > > take this contact themselves, even if they don't
> > > know about the
> > > Census itself.
> > >
> > > Still I have also introduced a system with tax
> > > credit to cheapen the
> > > costs of reimbursment for those officials that work
> > > with the Census.
> > > This leaves the costs for the surface mails and the
> > > phone calls. I
> > > have calculated that there would be about 35% to
> > > contact by these
> > > methods. This is of course just a guess. This would
> > > cost £11 ($17)
> > > for 28 persons (35%) (calculated in Swedish costs)
> > > which would be
> > > much more reasonable. I also expect a higher rate of
> > > answers by
> > > e-mail in countries like USA as the use of e-mail is
> > > much more
> > > frequent there than in some of the smaller
> > > Provinciae.
> > >
> > > I admit that I am on unsure ground in guessing, but
> > > I think You will
> > > have to admit that You are too. In the end I think
> > > we will have to go
> > > through with this Census and hope and work so that
> > > we can keep the
> > > costs down. As a Governor I will be free to donate
> > > some of the costs
> > > to Nova Roma, which I probably will do and I hope
> > > that some of my
> > > Legati also will do that. This is after all a
> > > voluntary organisation
> > > and most the Governors and Magistrati already have
> > > expenses that we
> > > pay from our own purse. This tradition is already
> > > active.
> > >
> > > >Salvete,
> > > >
> > > >A clarification from a governors point of view
> > > would be welcome.
> > > >
> > > >> III. The Census will consist of the following:
> > > >> Those who meet any of the following criteria
> > > will still be
> > > >considered citizens:
> > > >> 1. Those who voted in the main election (in
> > > November and/or
> > > >December)
> > > >> 2. Those who have paid taxes for the current
> > > calendar year
> > > >> 3. Patres Familias who have successfully
> > > responded to the yearly
> > > >> registration of the Lex Cornelia de Tabulis
> > > Gentium Novaromanarum
> > > >> Agendis
> > > >> 4. Persons who became citizens during the
> > > current calendar year
> > > >> 5. Persons who are successfully contacted as
> > > described in section
> > > >IV.
> > > >>
> > > >> IV. "Inactive" citizens are those who fail to
> > > meet at least one of
> > > >> the conditions in III. The following will lay
> > > down some of the
> > > >> procedures to contact inactive citizens.
> > > Inactive citizens are
> > > >those
> > > >> who will need to be contacted by the National
> > > Census. The following
> > > >> methods will be used to contact inactive
> > > citizens:
> > > >> A. Bulk Email. At least two attempts should be
> > > done to contact
> > > >> citizen via this avenue.
> > > >> B. Surface mail. "Inactive" Citizens who are
> > > unreachable by email
> > > >> shall receive a mailing. This shall be done on
> > > the provincial level
> > > >> by Governors and legati under the supervision of
> > > the Censors.
> > > >
> > > >How many citizens do you anticipate will need to be
> > > contacted by this
> > > >method? I would anticipate 50% to be a not
> > > unreasonable assumption.
> > > >This mean that as governor, I personally (with my
> > > staff) would need
> > > >to snail mail about 40 individuals. If it is as
> > > many as this, the
> > > >time and cost implications would be far too
> > > prohibitive for me to
> > > >proceed. To contact 40 cives by snail mail will
> > > cost in the region of
> > > >£20 ($30). Multiply this by all the provinces and
> > > that is a lot of
> > > >time and money expenditure. Are cives that fail to
> > > keep in touch with
> > > >NR and provide her with an up to date email address
> > > worth that kind
> > > >of expenditure?
> > > >
> > > >> C. Phone calls. If a Citizen is unreachable by
> > > e-mail or surface
> > > >> mail, he/she shall be contacted by phone.
> > > >
> > > >Is this after the incurred expenditure of a letter.
> > > Again, if the
> > > >amount of citizens involved are too large will it
> > > be actually worth
> > > >it?
> > > >
> > > >I wholly support the need to conduct a census of
> > > Nova Roman citizens
> > > >and will do the utmost to assist with the process.
> > > However, should
> > > >there not be a provision within the edict by which
> > > the process is
> > > >altered or halted should it become immediately
> > > apparent that the time
> > > >and cost implications involved are too great to
> > > make it cost
> > > >effective? It would be a great shame to lose a
> > > substantial portion of
> > > >our treasury on an exercise in contacting inactive
> > > NR citizens who
> > > >can't be bothered to keep in touch with us.
> > > >
> > > >Valete
> > > >
> > > >Decimus Iunius Silanus
> > > >Propraetor Britanniae.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Vale
> > >
> > > Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
> > > Senior Consul et Senator
> > > Propraetor Thules
> > > Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus
> > > Provincia Thules
> > > Civis Romanus sum
> > > ************************************************
> > > Cohors Consulis CFQ
> > > http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
> > > ************************************************
> > > Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
> > > "I'll either find a way or make one"
> > > ************************************************
> > > Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
> > > Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > It's Samaritans' Week. Help Samaritans help others.
> > Call 08709 000032 to give or donate online now at
> http://www.samaritans.org/support/donations.shtm
> >
> >
> > 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: Edictum Consulare CFQ VII de Comitiorum Populi Tributorum Convocatione
From:	"Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)" <mjk@datanet.ab.ca>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 15:01:31 -0000

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "jachthondus" <rompy@x> wrote:
> Hello Nova-Roma-People,
>
> May I be so free as to ask a humble-question again?
>
> You are discussing about "inactive-citizens", who'll have to
> be "activated", and about "paying-taxes"?...
>
> Letting pass this message through my little-brain:
>
> 1)So far I never have been an "inactive citizen"; (on the
contrary)...
> 2)What does this "paying-taxes" mean? Is that in REAL-money? And
for
>
Good morning from this side of the Creek Jachthondas,

1) Inactive citizens are those; especially the heads of the various
gens as well as office holders who we never hear from or who never
answer our mails. Either they lost interest and left NR or they met
their appointments with the ferryman on the River Styx.

2) Every year the citizens send a small tax payment to NR to help
keep things going. It is about 12.00 US but is indexed to various
countries because of the difference in costs of living, salaries etc.
So in Canada I pay about 9.00, someone in South America pays 3.00
etc. This tax can be payed by money order or paypal. The tax is
voluntary so you don't have to pay it if you do not wish to. People
who pay the tax are classed as Assidui and those who don't are called
Capite Censi. The only difference is that the vote of a Assidui is
more valuable than a Capite Censi and you must be Assidui to hold an
office in Nova Roma.

Respectfully,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Legion Application
From:	jmath669642reng@webtv.net
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 12:12:21 -0400 (EDT)

Commander;

The Legion Application of which you speak has not been recieved in
Militarium that I remember, withinthe last ten days. To whom did you
send it?? In answer to your question, to my knowledge the application
has not been recieved, processed, submitted for approval or forwarded to
the Senior Consul for his approval.

If you wish, you may send the application to me directly. I will review
the application to insure that all required information is on the
application, and then fwd the application to the Militarium Command
Group for consideration.

If you have not already done so, you may get an application form from
the Militarium's Scriba Major and Tribune Pompeia Strabo

trog99@hotmail.com

Respectfully and In Service;

Marcus Minucius Audens
Praefectus Castorum -- Sodalitas Miltarium -- Nova Roma

Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!


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

Subject:	=?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:[Nova-Roma]_Qui_dies_hodie_est=3F?=
From:	"=?iso-8859-1?Q?sa-mann@libero.it?=" <sa-mann@libero.it>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 19:02:36 +0200

> Sodales avete!
>
> "today is ante diem XI Kal. IVNIAS MMDCCLVI" (Nova Roma Calendar)
> "today is ante diem septum Idus Maias"
> (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/renaud.fortuner/)
>
> "The difference between the Julian calendar and our (Gregorian) calendar is
> currently 13 days (our March 13, 1900 was exactly February 29 in the Julian
> calendar). This explains the 13 day difference between today date given
> according to the Julian calendar and the usual Gregorian date".
>
> Mecastor!!!! Please, help me...I want to know what day is it!!!


Spectata Drusilla

it could not be easier.

It was Diuus Iulius, during the year of his third consulship, the DCVIII of Rome, the so called annus confusionis, who rearranged the irregularities due to past and missed, or even arbitrary INTERCALATIONES. These were meant, by Numa Pompilius who created them, to make correspond the solar and the lunar year.
We don't know if the annus confusionis lasted 443, 444 or 445 days, but we know that the civil year and the solar year corresponded again starting from the first new moon of year DCVIIII, kalendas ianuarias.
In this way 11 minutes and 12 seconds were still missing to the 6 complementary hours of each year that form the day BISSEXTO KALENDAS MARTIAS.

The excess is the smallest you can think of BUT every 400 years the total amount is 3 days.

It's been Pope Gregorius XIII of happy memory, a glory of Bononia, who, by the bull "Inter gravissimas" of 24 of february 1582, by which he put into practice the resolution passed at the Council of Trento of 4 december 1563, made october the 4 of 1582 to become october the 15: the correspondence between the civil year and the solar one was established anew. Without forgetting to suppress the Dies Bissextus of the centennial years multiple of 400.

The actual error it's in such a way reduced to 6 days every 10.000 anni: everything is going to be all right until beyond 3500.

Now to the point!

The error that you speak of has been corrected by the Pope in 1582. So today is plainly DIE XI ANTE KALENDAS IVNIAS. The difference of 10 days, NOT 13 days, which simply is Russian and Greek delay on our calendar, was an error today eliminated, deleted, not existing.
Unless you want to be so precise to calculate the true correspondences for the days between 45 before Christ and 1582. Now you know how big it can be. From 11 minutes and 12 seconds for the year DCVIIII of Rome and 10 days for year 1582 of Christ. Good work, then.

Keep in mind your need eventually stops october the 4 of 1582, that is to say october the 15...

Unless you want to calculate the actual error which is more or less 1 Hour, 7 minutes and 30 seconds every 78 yaears and 45 days.

In any case it will be of good help reading the three big lovely volumes by F. K. Ginzel published in Leipzig the years 1906, 1911 and 1914: Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen chronologie.

reverenter

Gallus Solaris Alexander

Bononia

Italia.

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: On the Census
From:	"J. Mallory" <scribe73dc@yahoo.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 10:12:41 -0700 (PDT)

Avete--

Titus Octavius Pius wrote:
> Just a language issue. IV says "fail to meet at
> least one", as in "don't even meet one" of the
> conditions, not as in "failed one or more".

Thank you for your response, Accensus.

Because of the ambiguity of "at least one," would it
not be clearer to say "any"? (Id est, "failure to meet
any of the requirements....")

I can see how you are parsing out the sentence, and it
is clear if one uses "at least one" in the same way
logicians do. But unfortunately, common usage (for
some value of "common," admittedly) would point to the
second reading, not the first.

Salvete,
L. Modius Rufus


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Books
From:	StarVVreck@aol.com
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 13:51:32 EDT

Salve!

I have to differ about your choice for #1. it has to be...> Latin for All
> Occasions, the humorous phrase book.
>
> Vale,
>
> Iulius Titinius Antonius






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

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Re: Qui dies hodie est?
From:	"Gnaeus Salix Astur" <salixastur@yahoo.es>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 18:49:45 -0000

Salvete Quirites; et salve, Drusilla.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "iris serva" <iris_serva@h...>
wrote:
> Sodales avete!
>
> "today is ante diem XI Kal. IVNIAS MMDCCLVI" (Nova Roma Calendar)
> "today is ante diem septum Idus Maias"
> (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/renaud.fortuner/)
>
> "The difference between the Julian calendar and our (Gregorian)
> calendar is currently 13 days (our March 13, 1900 was exactly
> February 29 in the Julian calendar). This explains the 13 day
> difference between today date given according to the Julian
> calendar and the usual Gregorian date".
>
> Mecastor!!!! Please, help me...I want to know what day is it!!!
> Salvete
> Drusilla Lania Iris

Our calendar (365 days per year, with 366 on leap years) is based on
the Julian Calendar, the calendar established by C. Iulius Caesar in
the year DCCVIII A·V·C (45 BCE). The Julian Calendar had the same
name for each month and the same number of days for each month.
However, our current calendar (called the Gregorian Calendar) is
slightly different from the Julian Calendar. Actually, a solar year
lasts for 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 46 seconds. That means
that an extra day every four years is actually too much (that makes
an average year of 365 days and 6 hours). This difference created a
mistake that had amounted to several days by the late 16th century
(when the Gregorian Calendar was issued).

Here, in Nova Roma, we have decided to follow the Gregorian
correction, both because it is scientifically better and because it
is used all over the world. I think that the Collegium Pontificium
added a dies nefastus to the calendar to expiate this change in the
ritual...

CN·SALIX·ASTVR·T·F·A·NEP·TRIB·OVF

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Qui dies hodie est?
From:	=?iso-8859-1?q?M=20Arminius=20Maior?= <marminius@yahoo.com.br>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 16:26:29 -0300 (ART)

Salve

--- iris serva <iris_serva@hotmail.com> escreveu: >
Sodales avete!
>
> "today is ante diem XI Kal. IVNIAS MMDCCLVI" (Nova
> Roma Calendar)
> "today is ante diem septum Idus Maias"
> (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/renaud.fortuner/)
[..]
> Mecastor!!!! Please, help me...I want to know what
> day is it!!!
> Salvete
> Drusilla Lania Iris

M.Arminius: An interesting link about various
calendars, including the roman;

http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-roman.html


Vale
Marcus Arminius

_______________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
O melhor e-mail gratuito da internet: 6MB de espaço, antivírus, acesso POP3, filtro contra spam.
http://br.mail.yahoo.com/

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On the Census
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 16:45:42 -0400

Salve, L. Modius Rufus:

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 10:12:41AM -0700, J. Mallory wrote:
> Avete--
>
> Titus Octavius Pius wrote:
> > Just a language issue. IV says "fail to meet at
> > least one", as in "don't even meet one" of the
> > conditions, not as in "failed one or more".
>
> Thank you for your response, Accensus.
>
> Because of the ambiguity of "at least one," would it
> not be clearer to say "any"? (Id est, "failure to meet
> any of the requirements....")

It seems to me that this usage would be subject to _exactly_ the same
parsing errors as the current phrasing. Slippery, this English! :)

> I can see how you are parsing out the sentence, and it
> is clear if one uses "at least one" in the same way
> logicians do. But unfortunately, common usage (for
> some value of "common," admittedly) would point to the
> second reading, not the first.

Possibly something like this would work to eliminate what ambiguity
there is (if it is deemed necessary):


1. To qualify, you must meet at least one of the following criteria:

<condition1>
<condition2>
<condition3>
<condition4>

2. Failure to do so will result in

<outcome>

OR

2. Failure to meet at least one of the above criteria will result in

<outcome>


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Quidquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.
Whatever this may be, I fear the Greeks even when they're bringing gifts.
-- Vergil, "Aenis. The priest Laokoon's warning when seeing the Trojan horse."

Subject:	Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Books
From:	"Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@msn.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 15:55:05 -0400

Salve Iulius Titinius Antonius

But where is your top ten?

Vale

Tiberius

spqr753@msn.com


----- Original Message -----
From: <StarVVreck@aol.com>
To: <Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Roman Books


> Salve!
>
> I have to differ about your choice for #1. it has to be...> Latin for All
> > Occasions, the humorous phrase book.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Iulius Titinius Antonius
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [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] Qui dies hodie est?
From:	Caius Minucius Scaevola <ben@callahans.org>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 17:13:48 -0400

Ave, Gallus Solaris Alexander -

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 07:02:36PM +0200, sa-mann@libero.it wrote:
> > Sodales avete!
> >
> > "today is ante diem XI Kal. IVNIAS MMDCCLVI" (Nova Roma Calendar)
> > "today is ante diem septum Idus Maias"
> > (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/renaud.fortuner/)
> >
> > "The difference between the Julian calendar and our (Gregorian) calendar is
> > currently 13 days (our March 13, 1900 was exactly February 29 in the Julian
> > calendar). This explains the 13 day difference between today date given
> > according to the Julian calendar and the usual Gregorian date".
> >
> > Mecastor!!!! Please, help me...I want to know what day is it!!!
>
>
> Spectata Drusilla
>
> it could not be easier.

Oh, what a wonderful preface to the explanation that follows! :)

> It was Diuus Iulius, during the year of his third consulship, the
> DCVIII of Rome, the so called annus confusionis, who rearranged the
> irregularities due to past and missed, or even arbitrary
> INTERCALATIONES. These were meant, by Numa Pompilius who created them,
> to make correspond the solar and the lunar year. We don't know if the
> annus confusionis lasted 443, 444 or 445 days, but we know that the
> civil year and the solar year corresponded again starting from the
> first new moon of year DCVIIII, kalendas ianuarias. In this way 11
> minutes and 12 seconds were still missing to the 6 complementary hours
> of each year that form the day BISSEXTO KALENDAS MARTIAS.
>
> The excess is the smallest you can think of BUT every 400 years the
> total amount is 3 days.
>
> It's been Pope Gregorius XIII of happy memory, a glory of Bononia,
> who, by the bull "Inter gravissimas" of 24 of february 1582, by which
> he put into practice the resolution passed at the Council of Trento of
> 4 december 1563, made october the 4 of 1582 to become october the 15:
> the correspondence between the civil year and the solar one was
> established anew. Without forgetting to suppress the Dies Bissextus of
> the centennial years multiple of 400.
>
> The actual error it's in such a way reduced to 6 days every 10.000
> anni: everything is going to be all right until beyond 3500.
>
> Now to the point!
>
> The error that you speak of has been corrected by the Pope in 1582. So
> today is plainly DIE XI ANTE KALENDAS IVNIAS. The difference of 10
> days, NOT 13 days, which simply is Russian and Greek delay on our
> calendar, was an error today eliminated, deleted, not existing.
> Unless you want to be so precise to calculate the true correspondences
> for the days between 45 before Christ and 1582. Now you know how big
> it can be. From 11 minutes and 12 seconds for the year DCVIIII of Rome
> and 10 days for year 1582 of Christ. Good work, then.
>
> Keep in mind your need eventually stops october the 4 of 1582, that is
> to say october the 15...
>
> Unless you want to calculate the actual error which is more or less 1
> Hour, 7 minutes and 30 seconds every 78 yaears and 45 days.
>
> In any case it will be of good help reading the three big lovely
> volumes by F. K. Ginzel published in Leipzig the years 1906, 1911 and
> 1914: Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen chronologie.

As a relevant comment, anyone who has Perl installed on their system can
download the Date::Roman module from <http://cpan.org/>; it contains a
slightly simpler version of the above explanation in the documentation,
and a script called "RomanDate" that prints out today's date:

ben@Fenrir:~$ RomanDate
a.d. XI Kal. Jun. MMDCCLVI AUC

Plugging it into your email automatically is left as an excercise, etc.
:)


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Faber est suae quisque fortunae.
Every man is the artisan of his own fortune.
-- Appius Claudius Caecus

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] Bienvenidos Vera Argentina y Lucius Argentinus Caesar
From:	"Daniel O. Villanueva" <danielovi@ciudad.com.ar>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 20:10:49 -0300

Salvete Vera Argentina et Luci Argentine Caesar

Como Propraetor argentino quiero darles la más cálida
bienvenida a la provincia Novaromana de Argentina.
La lista provincial es : http://ar.groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_Argentina ,
Y el sitio provincial es : http://argentina.novaroma.org .


As Porpraetor provincialis I wish to give you the most warm welcome to the novaroman province of Argentina.
The provincial mailing list is : http://ar.groups.yahoo.com/group/NR_Argentina , and the website is : http://argentina.novaroma.org .



Curate ut valeatis
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus
Propraetor provincialis Argentinae





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

Subject:	[Nova-Roma] [Fwd: Roman Days Food]
From:	Joanne Shaver <merlinia@comcast.net>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2003 19:52:51 -0400

Salvete, All! Merlinia Ambrosia here.
I'm not the best at getting things out via email; I thought I'd sent
this, but it didn't all go thru.
As some of you know, I cook Saturday night's dinner(a symposia,
really) at Roman Days in MD.
Here is the message.
Do not try to mail after the 30th.
Email me in any case.
Sorry about the delay.
Valete!
-M.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Roman Days Food
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:12:52 -0400
From: Joanne Shaver <merlinia@comcast.net>
To: mamt@lrcm.usuhs.mil

Salvete, Quintus et LegioXX!
It has been a Very busy year for me, and I lost track!

There will be Food! I have planned a feast for 25, and Breakfast each
morning. It will be $15 per person; ( I finally broke down the costs!)
Do you eat shrimp?
Please send this info out to the usual suspects.

I'd really like to have a name, Latin name, and cheque by June 1st.
(I know that only leaves 2 weeks, but if you're planning on it, you're
expecting it, right?)

Please send to J.W.Shaver
147 Franklin Ave.
Maplewood, N.J. 07040

Thank you!!!
Valete!
-M.