GNAEUS IULIUS CAESAR

Pax in our time

2010-12-09T13:06:00.002-07:00

Having devoted a considerable amount of effort here to the pursuit and verbal crucifixion of my old arch foe Caeso Fabius Buteo Modianus, I think it both noteworthy and fair to record the fact that we both have decided to declare a state of pax. There are bigger issues at stake in Nova Roma than those which divided us in 2004.

Currently Modianus has joined the merry band of "outcasts" in the Back Alley, something which required a fair degree of spine and fortitude given the vitriol that was catapulted from that locale onto his head. He has survived unscathed, despite the occasional ball of flame.

Modianus has also held his own in quite a few tense debates, underscoring the point that he obviously didn't join that "nest of vipers" in a moment of self-flagellation in order to silently endure the pain of thirty or so "snakes" crawling up his pant leg and stinging him with the "venom" of recriminations or triumphal crowing.

It's good to see him there, for it underlines the closing of one era in Nova Roma and, hopefully, the commencement of a better future.

Nova Roma Reborn

2010-12-05T23:47:00.012-07:00

As we approach a new year it is clear, sadly as much as it was in past years, that there is no firm plan that has been, is, or is currently likely to be pursued, to put Nova Roma on a path to success.

Maybe now is the time to consider implementing a plan, and dealing with some of the issues that seem complex but in reality can be easily solved.

For those that haven't read the document below, it outlines a plan for rebuilding Nova Roma, and addresses a wide range of issues.

Nova Roma Reborn - A discussion paper

In the forum, on which laws raise concerns

2010-12-02T21:21:00.011-07:00

My real concern lies with actually creating a list and proceeding to eliminate the legislation without first checking how the disappearance of a particular law can affect other legislation. It is, sadly, not as easy as checking to see whether the law you want to eradicate is cross referenced by name in another lex. Oh that it were that simple.

The problems really start when a set of circumstances conspire to create an unforeseen situation, which wouldn't have occurred had you not eliminated the targeted lex in the first place. So how do we prevent that? By carefully examining the legislation, line by line, section by section, looking to other leges to determine if the removal of that content would affect them, by consultation, by trying to predict crisis points, and generally proceeding with caution.

As I said before the praetors are unlikely to be the driving force for the elimination of say the legal code in Nova Roma. Practically the consuls drive that particular bus, determining their legislative agenda and priorities.

You can rest assured though that if elected I will expect the consuls to fully involve myself and my colleague in a through consultation process, not to be swayed by demands and expectations to eliminate this or that lex immediately, to procure the advice of the senate so as to allow for the experience of former consuls, praetors and all our senatorial colleagues to be utilized.

On those items that require constitutional changes it will be necessary and prudent to ensure that the proposed change can command the requisite support in the senate BEFORE the matter is taken to comitia. That will ensure precious legislative time is not wasted on bringing such items without warning to the comitia, passing them, only to find they fail inside the senate. On such significant constitutional items the consuls might do well to commit to the senate to seek a senatus consultum prior to seeking a comitia vote.

Additionally promoting this approach to the senate will mark a change in the way in which it has been used, and promote and develop, hopefully, not only a degree of independence of thought but also an expectation that such a practice would become common place in future years.

Negotiation to ensure passage of significant items has been sadly lacking in the last few years, for it wasn't seen as necessary when one faction or another commanded sufficient voting muscle to push items through. Times have changed, and should change and I would hope our colleagues would place any proposals for legislative amendments, especially the wholesale eradication of legislation, under intense scrutiny, and that the consuls afford them the chance to do so. If they don't, then nothing will have been learnt from the crises of recent years and they, and future consuls, may find their legislative proposals die a painful death on the floor of the house.

Anyone in management, be it in government or business, will tell you that simply tearing up policies, or in our cases leges, without doing the due diligence necessary to ensure that the situation doesn't become far worse, as well as ensuring that replacement legislation is ready and has been equally scrutinized, is a recipe for disaster. I am not advocating no change or prevarication, but measured caution, and not charging in like a bull at a gate, repealing this or that lex, only to find we need it later, especially if we could have predicted such a need by taking a measure of time more.

I also hope that if there is actually merit in legislative change that its timetable is not dictated by the desire to "achieve" something in one's consular year at the expense of it running over into the next year and thereby ensuring full due diligence is done. If the senate so wishes it can pass a senatus consultum to require the next year's consuls to continue the work, so change need not be mandatory within a twelve month period and must not be driven around consular ambition. This is a general comment, and not directed at the current candidates for consul.

Change for change sake, or just because it is popular, or change without due diligence is a very bad thing. We should proceed in a measured and cautious way.

In the forum, asked on laws to repeal or change

2010-11-26T14:21:00.002-07:00

Whoever is successful in the election for praetor will have to, to a large extent, follow the lead and legislative program of the consuls for next year. Praetors do not have a free hand amice, as you know, at implementing a legislative program of their own.

That said, what laws do I want to repeal you ask. Any law that is so badly written that it cannot be salvaged without a total rewrite, any law that is irrelevant to the current and foreseeable circumstances of the res publica, and any law that conflicts with the constitution to a degree that it could not be salvaged without a total rewrite.

As to changing laws, the same criteria as above, especially in respect of laws where only a small percentage of the overall law is contradictory.

A reasonable time frame is a subjective judgment, which is going to be affected by numerous factors, but if the work is started immediately in January there is no reason that I can see that would prevent the process being completed by December 31st.

Now, I am sure for some the burning issue is the fate of the Lex Salicia poenalis and Lex Salicia iudiciaria. Put simply the system they outline has not worked, does not work and will not work, with the degree of universal support necessary for a legal code. The reason being, that on all sides of the spectrum there is recognition that the practical application of trials do not match the expectations of justice and the goals of the drafters.

However, having reviewed some suggestions for replacing them, I note that some suggest total abolishment and for others the solution is a simplified trial process. The issue goes deeper than that. I believe it is completely impossible to find citizens that will be widely accepted as neutral in their assessment of the evidence. It doesn't matter if they can be neutral; it is the perception that counts, which influences the level of support for the system.

Additionally there are sections of the current leges which it would be absolutely vital to retain if a simplified trail process was adopted, namely temporal limits of Nova Roman authority. That is just one example. Simple and short when constructing a legal code is not necessarily best. leaving the process to be decided by the sitting praetor will without question be a source of dispute, as it was before. The real question is do we need an internal justice system? Add to that, should we even attempt to construct one with such a small population base, where charges of bias will run rampant against those comprising the court?

The easy thing to do in response to your question is to produce a shopping list of laws to replace, repeal, but the issues run far deeper than knocking a few unpopular ones off the books, only to discover that the price of popularity is an even bigger mess. Any changes to our legal code have to command near universal support, they need to be well mooted and discussed at all levels, ideally they should be modeled "in action" to see how they perform. It maybe the popular thing to do to stake the legal code, but I as praetor would be obligated to ensure that I didn't promote a popular cause and create a legacy of a huge mess for someone else to have to deal with next year, or in the years to come.

So amice, I won't give you your shopping list of laws for the axe, but I will state that if I am elected I will assist immediately in any law reform they undertake, and to give politically neutral and constructive critical comments, and generally assist the process - which must be community based as it is the people's legal system - of review.

In the forum, on cake and the Hospitality list

2010-11-23T20:19:00.003-07:00

I often heard the complaint that the ML is a terrible place, some find it intimidating, there are reports of citizens and prospective citizens throwing in the towel after one heated debate or the other.

Various attempts have been made to rectify this, from overbearing moderation masquerading as a public order technique, but to some having more to do with the suppression of free speech and silencing opponents, to periods when the more frequent posters from all "sides" swore off discussion of politics to put to the test the claim that a surge of creative posting was being prevented by the political atmosphere.

These attempts at political non-discussion produced only silence, maybe because people were only too aware that any post they made might end up being judged on its content as to whether creativity and genteel valuable discussion had flourished.

The obvious fact is that this list and its struggles and strife is a reflection of part of our societal issues and this fact seems to have raised the question as to whether a prospective citizen should be shielded from this discord. Well, this list is the equivalent of a virtual arena at times, where virtual body parts are scattered around in one argument or another. It always seems to have been so reading previous years' posts. Now many say that this list is not all that Nova Roma is. That is true, in theory, but since political issues dominate, this list is actually about the key issues of the day. Returning to the frequent claims of how ghastly this list can be, and how many citizens it has cost us, if that is so and given the failure to alter that my one means or another, over the course of years and years, then logic dictates that the prospective citizens should not be exposed to this "vileness". After all, you can't have your cake and eat it.

The new list will give prospective citizens a chance to be exposed to the other side of Nova Roma, that many have complained never gets to truly flourish on this list. Why would we, if those claims are true, not want to present the best side of Nova Roma to prospective citizens? There will be time enough if they join us for them to be corrupted by all the terrible horrors that occur on this list, and take their place in the stands, popcorn in hand gawping at all the verbal duels to the death and egos and arguments hitting the sand here.

Come now, all of you who have made almost careers out of denouncing what goes on here, why would we not want to protect those valuable and vulnerable assets, prospective citizens, from all this wickedness here?

Of course I don't believe that this place is terrible, and I do think that some people among us have used these scare tactics to "political" ends, to steer new citizens to the purity and light of one faction or another.

Well now we have an opportunity to remove from this list non-citizens bent on participating in political debates that only concern the citizens of Nova Roma (would the ancient Romans have tolerated a Greek for example standing on a soap box yelling about how rotten Rome or some of its politicians were, or would he have been manhandled about and tossed out the gates?)and at the same time answer once and for all all these endless complaints about what a detrimental effect the atmosphere on this list has on prospective citizens.

Since we have proven we don't seem to be able to change the nature of this list, then let us remove the non-citizens and the vulnerable prospective citizens, so that all of us seasoned veterans can either return to arena watching, or be down on the sand clubbing each other over the head.

Cake anyone?

In the forum, on candidature for praetor

2010-11-14T10:38:00.003-07:00

I announce my intention to stand for Praetor.

There are potentially three main challenges facing any praetor. Firstly the somewhat confused nature of the wording of some of our laws and the constitution. Secondly, dealing with potential trials under the current legal system. Thirdly, moderating this forum.

The first, wording of laws and constitution, requires a collaborative effort on the part of consuls, praetors and other magistrates and senate. I am currently appointed to the senatorial committee on reviewing the bylaws of Nova Roma. I have macronational experience through my job in preparing and reviewing provincial legislation.

The second, sadly, is somewhat of a feature of Nova Roman life. Until such time as the process for trials and prosecutions is changed, the system has to be administered in a fair and efficient manner. That means conducting any trial according to the law of Nova Roma as it is written. I have assisted the advocatus in one trial and have first hand experience of the pitfalls and risks of deviating from following the written law. However potential litigants should be aware that if elected I will make the responsibility of the person commencing the prosecution to work hard to just get his or her case accepted, and I will encourage alternative remedies and offer to mediate or arbitrate a dispute outside of a formal trial process, if all parties agree to it.

Lastly, the moderation of this forum. This has proved, to say the least, an explosive issue at times. My stand is simple. The constitution and laws of Nova Roma limit a praetor to only moderate or remove posting rights when a clear and imminent danger exists. Most times posts that are explosive don't risk destroying Nova Roma. I think we need far less restriction, more trust, and we also need to stop taking a rather patronizing attitude that some people inherently can't be trusted and have to be moderated for eternity. That is a sentiment I have heard over the years, and I simply don't accept it. If someone crosses the line by swearing, making threats or other wording which either breaches Yahoo TOS, Nova Roman law, or since Yahoo operates in the US, federal US law, then I will deal with it. Posting objections to my actions, other magistrates, the senate, does not constitute a threat to Nova Roma. Being held to be annoying and irritating isn't an offense, fortunately since many of the regular posters (myself included) would be on moderation.

Good fortune to all candidates and success in office to those that win.

Structure, incentive and purpose

2009-06-09T04:22:00.005-06:00

In the intervening time since my last post, Nova Roma has had its usual fair share of issues. It would be redundant to recount these for while the specifics might differ slightly from earlier ones recorded here, they are essentially still the same as always.

The issues of corporate compliance, maintenance of public order in the forum, elections and their validity or otherwise, our legal system and trials, and the host of other contentious matters are important but they are only symptoms of a deeper failure. This failure is not that of individuals, but rather a failure of structure, incentive and purpose.

The structure of Nova Roma needs attention, to solve once and for all the divisive and relatively curable problem of the needs of the non-profit corporation, and its attendant US state regulations that govern it, consistently clashing with the needs of a Roman republic. This can be done.

We need to provide an incentive to become fully engaged in value driven projects generated continually and across the whole spectrum of the community, that are linked to achieving long-term goals. This can be done.

Lastly, we need to redefine our ultimate purpose to take account of changed factors since Nova Roma was founded, for we need a clear sense of direction in pursuit of clearly formulated goals, along with target dates for achieving them. This can be done.

Of course issues will arise, they always will do, but it is time for a change of focus on all sides. That has been said many times in Nova Roma, but these three matters must become the sole and detailed focus of analysis and problem solving. In order to do that all divisions have to be put aside for this greater purpose.

It would be the height of idealistic folly to think that Nova Roma could suddenly coalesce smoothly around a process of problem solving for the benefit of us all, for those divisions run deep. What should be possible is to file those divisions and grievances away in the pending drawer and turn instead to deal with these three areas.

If that can be achieved and we deal with these three problems in a non-judgmental and productive manner I believe that over time we will discover that we can make progress and resolve them, and that the long-term effect of that maybe to ensure that we are far too busy to remove that folder from the drawer. Eventually those grievances will fade into irrelevance compared to what we have managed to create.

The current situation can no longer be considered tenable by anyone in Nova Roma, regardless of what their ‘political” stance is. If we do not focus our united efforts on these three areas Nova Roma will decline into complete irrelevance.

That is not acceptable.

The Asinutaur Alliance - ass of Nova Roma

2008-04-06T16:02:00.014-06:00

It has become apparent that this year in Nova Roma will be significantly different. In some of the previous years consuls and praetors just stumbled into one “crisis” after another. Sometimes they could have done nothing to avoid it, though it has to be said the number of these occasions were few and far between. Mostly they ended up in a bog of their own making due to a singular inability to plan and follow a strategy.

Knowing how many times the Constitution had proved to be the undoing of many a magistrate, it is still a source of amazement that a few of them still blundered wildly on, seemingly with not a care in the world in defiance of all warnings, only to appear utterly stupefied, aghast, hurt and offended when the deluge of criticism rained upon their heads. Such was the way of Nova Roman in the past, our very own mos maiorum of incompetence.

Now however we see something different, in the form of deliberate and ignorant abandonment of any pretense at acting in the interests of Nova Roma, which as a community necessarily encompasses those whose views magistrates are in conflict with.

Our senior magistrates have embarked on a course of legalized persecution and proscription that is rash, ill considered, unconstitutional, illegal, unnecessary, vindictive and partisan. It is also asinine.

This time they have actually planned the route they have taken. They cannot even claim to have wandered off the path into the deep dark forest of unconstitutionality. They mapped the route and set off, with all the arrogance of a Quinctilius Varus.

Knowing that the political trials of Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur would be unpopular and disregarding the likely opposition as the irrelevant dying gasps of their old opponents, this gaggle of political geniuses pressed on. The “trials” resembled a farce, not much above the level of a Punch and Judy show.

The blatant bias and outrageous conduct of the Praetor, who deserves so little mention that I shall simply refer to him as Praetor Nemo, was unrestrained and unashamedly arrogant. Nemo though, much like his cinema namesake, is a little fish in a small tank. His relevance is transitory and this political non-entity whose only crowning glory was the secession of his own province right under his nose, will fade away to become probably Consul and Censor in due course, for every good dog that has performed well deserves a bone.

The level of judgment exercised in these series of shabby events is no greater than in the past. The difference lies in the level of arrogance, law breaking, political incompetence, and the mens rea of this latest political faction to break upon the Nova Roman stage of politics, the Asinutaur Alliance.

The Asinutaur has the temperament of a donkey and the frailness and arrogance of a human, and has survived only this long by wildly kicking its political hind legs out at any target. It doggedly has deliberately trotted along this path of political trials, trampling all before it. It may think it is a stallion, but it is seen for what it is. Doggedly stupid, mulish and short sighted to boot.

The Asinutaur cannot walk politically with a natural flowing motion. It lurches, gets its legs crossed, stumbles and falls. It is just a raddled pantomime donkey suit containing the same old collection of malcontents, failures and vindictive characters, with a few new recruits for company, who have been seduced to climb inside.

It was bad enough when Nova Roman magistrates did not think and blundered into the quicksand. It is far worse now when this latest gaggle does think, for they not only see the quicksand and know that it is quicksand, but they still forge on regardless. They seem gripped by some messianic conviction that they won’t be sucked in, no doubt because they intend to kick a number of people into the pit and step over their bodies to safety.

The Asinutaur Alliance may feel that it has achieved its objective, but the swathe of damage that it has caused in pursuit of vindictive revenge has not been lost on many who were no friend to Cincinnatus and that number is growing.

Nova Farm and the tale of three little pigs

2008-03-30T03:11:00.035-06:00

The debacle of the trial of Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur has ended. George Orwell could not have penned a more riveting example of despotic power wielded by small-minded creatures. Nova Roma appears to have bred quite a few of the overlords of Animal Farm, with our very own Napoleon, Squealer and Pinkeye.

Napoleon is well on his way to usurping full power in the barn. Oh how a few months can change one. Before his election Napoleon was preaching an era of prosperity and forward thinking. He seemed the very model of a pig for the people. The animals were all going to join hands and step forward into the sunlight, or so they were essentially told. This was to be a new age and the dawn of the rebirth of Nova Farm.

Very quickly though it became clear that the promised land wasn’t full of sunlight and blessed with an abundance of intellectual and moral riches. No instead it started to resemble a slagheap, and the dark clouds gathered. First went Snowball. For years his eventual assassins had shamelessly used him to their own ends. He was good enough at one point to be touted as the symbol of unity.

Then his own acolytes turned on him and initiated a plan to depose him and drive him from the gates of Nova Farm. As he departed Snowball burned down his own sty rather than allow its infestation by this sad little gang of ingrates.

Pinkeye had his own agenda and it quickly manifested itself as revenge. You see Pinkeye as a little pig had a huge inferiority complex and Benjamin the donkey had once kicked him out of his stable. Enraged at this insult to his massive ego, Pinkeye swore to have his revenge, and before long the hapless Benjamin was arraigned for trial.

Squealer was placed in charge of this legalized lynching. Benjamin ignored the summons and was convicted in his absence, in a clear breach of the Commandments. However Squealer managed to confuse the animals so much when justifying his actions, that most of them eventually just assumed that the Commandments actually did say what Squealer said. Few bothered to go out of the barn and read them.

Benjamin was ordered to hand over his stable and fined a large bag of carrots, for having the temerity to own private property. Not satisfied with this though Napoleon had filed his own charges against him. Napoleon and Pinkeye both coveted the stable and if they couldn’t have it they were going to make Benjamin hand over even more carrots.

Once again Napoleon's mouth piece Squealer trotted in. The piglets, most of whom were rumoured to be the children of Napoleon, were stacked into the jury benches. They sat obediently on the side lines, asking few questions. One at the start of the trial wasn’t even sure why he was there. Squealer decided to give the animals the appearance of a fair trial and even though Benjamin wasn’t there a second time, commenced what rapidly turned into a farce.

Squealer tried to be ominous and threatening, but actually only managed to portray himself as narrow minded and bigoted against Benjamin and any animal that spoke for him. He proceeded to suppress evidence, spoke for Napoleon, consistently rewrote the rules of the trial, twisted the Commandments, used the threat of the dogs to keep the animals in line and generally acted as a supreme example of unchecked power wielded by a very little and unimposing pig.

Napoleon spoke briefly, happy to leave it mostly to Squealer to speak for him. He sallied in and out of the barn, in an atmosphere of complacent self-adoration, now calling himself the Father of all Animals. The piglets eyeing their daddy were dazzled by his oratory. He had you see studied very long and hard how to say an awful lot that meant very little.

At one point Pinkeye had a momentary meltdown and fell into a raging snit, complaining he had been robbed of the chance to confront Benjamin with his heinous crimes. Few of the animals paid any attention as Pinkeye was one of those pigs who huffed and puffed a lot.

Squealer called for the verdict and led all the piglets into a private sty in the barn, so they could discuss the case and proceeded to stay there. Many of the animals wondered if this was to ensure that the piglets, who really had seemed very disinterested in the trial, remembered what was expected of them. Despite this two of the piglets never even bothered to vote. It was thus hardly surprising that all but one of them voted to condemn Benjamin.

This goes to prove that the Commandments simply didn’t matter to Napoleon and Squealer and that:

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

Once more into the breach.

2008-02-25T02:22:00.006-07:00

After avoiding posting in 2007 as I was Accensus to the then Consul Tiberius Galerius Paulinus, I anticipated doing the same in 2008 since I had accepted the offer of Consul Titus Iulius Sabinus to serve as his Accensus. Upon reflection it had seemed better to maintain as much a degree of public neutrality as I could on issues while occupying this position.

Well, no more. On Saturday 23rd February I requested Sabinus relieve me of my position, in order that I could with all honour concentrate of opposing such policies as his consular colleague may put forth that strike at the heart of good order, law, equity and the Constitution of Nova Roma.

So once again the elephant of illegality clomps around Nova Roma, trampling all before it with sadly both Consuls, the Praetors and the Tribunes perched on top of it. Bringing up the rear is of course Maior, clutching at its tail. The long awaited purge has begun and we know of course that there are so many names on the blacklist it probably requires not a black book but a scroll to record them all.

More on this debacle later. For now it suffices to say that it is exceedingly refreshing to once again be offering a commentary and insight into the madcap world of Nova Roma. All is well in the republic for the Constitution is being broken, people are resigning or being exiled, laws are being ignored and a general tension pervades the air in the forum. Life as we know it continues unabated.

Sooty faces

2006-12-31T19:46:00.001-07:00

The New Year has struck in Rome already. Our Consuls have changed. Looking back on the last twelve months, Nova Roma has hosted a re-run of the film "The Great Race". Professor Fate (Jack Lemmon) and his sidekick Maximillian (Peter Falk) bumbled and stumbled their way from one failure to another. Wheels fell off their car, plots were laid and went awry, unlikely alliances were forged and forgotten, and of course a huge pie fight ensued. Sound familiar?

Nova Roma's consular versions of Professor Fate and Maximillian managed to accidentally pour sugar in their own gas tank and attempted running repairs to breakdowns of their own making, managing to short circuit their electric system in the process.

If that wasn't enough they stuffed their vehicle full of multiple navigators all of whom seem to have either had no map to read, fought over the same map and tore it in the process or if they had their own map read it upside down and back to front. If they had all pulled together then the result might have been different.

Instead the result, not surprisingly, was that the consular version of the Hannibal Twin-8 bucked and swayed all over what should have been a fairly straight forward course, managed to "go agricultural" by veering off into fields, lost a few of the occupants along the way, caused a fair swathe of damage and saw many onlookers shaking their heads in amazement at this carnival of disaster and mayhem.

Now of course, weighed against the realities of the world outside our virtual gates, none of these events of the last twelve months could be described as a "crisis" or a "disaster". They were however a series of botched ignominious failures, brought about by a total lack of leadership and vision.

The consular engine was fuelled by partisan politics and personal grudges, and therefore it is hardly surprising that the year reverberated to a series of backfires and coughing and spluttering as they ground to a halt. This fuel was simply too explosive. On more than one occasion our own Fate and Maximillian emerged from the driver's seat with soot on their faces, the result of this combustible mixture exploding.

They not only lost the race through navigational errors, coarse steering, hasty gear changing, poor vehicle maintenance, and generally inept driving skills, but they also failed to finish the race. What makes this level of bumbling and stumbling even more staggering is that this was a one car race.

This wasn't meant to be a Great Race, instead it should have been a comfortable little jaunt into the countryside and back, along well maintained roads. They decided however to head off into the great unknown, chart a dangerous and divisive course, stop frequently for extended rest breaks and then drive with reckless abandon in order to make up for lost time.

They didn't even cross the finish line and are still out there in the wilderness of Nova Roman politics. Tonight as the sands of time ran out and as the last grain dropped, Fate and Maximillian were nowhere to be seen. It cannot even be said with any honesty that they passed the first checkpoint.

Instead we have watched them drive around in circles for a year, achieving nothing and wasting their entry form into this exclusive race. Simply staying in the race is not a success or anything to be proud of, rather it is the baseline expectation for elected officials.

So their race has ended without any explosion of champagne corks, no streamers, no honking horns, no adoring looks, in fact nothing has marked its end, other than Professor Fate rushing to enter another race in the censorial Hannibal Twin-9, and it should serve as an object lesson to all current and future consuls, a veritable model of poor planning, incompetence, irritability and impatience.

We can only hope that the year ahead sees our new Consuls embarking on less dangerous and more considerate driving and definitely paying more attention to the road ahead; less haste more speed.

A good day to be Roman

2006-11-20T02:14:00.001-07:00

The election of Tiberius Galerius Paulinus as Consul is excellent news. He brings a good combination of practicality, traditionalism and energy to the office. He can be doggedly determined, yet he is also able to negotiate alternative routes to the same goal.

Gaius Equitius Cato was elected as Praetor, an equally excellent result. Anyone who frequents the Nova Roman forum on a regular basis will know this man. Dedicated, witty, charming, relentless in debate and analytical in reflection, this man is the quintessential Roman patrician. He can be a true friend and doughty foe. Justice is safe in this man’s hands.

Titus Iulius Sabinus was not so fortunate in his attempt at the Praetor’s tribunal, which is a great pity for he and Cato were a good team this year as Curule Aediles. Sabinus is organized, methodical, inspiring and a really good man. Nova Roma benefited immensely from all his hard work organizing the various games and festivals his year. He will make an excellent Praetor, and I hope that day will be soon.

Hopefully better days lie ahead for Nova Roma.

Ungodly, unspeakable, and unattainable

2006-10-19T23:39:00.001-06:00

The proposed elimination of the Collegium Pontificum’s right to issue constitutionally protected decreta signals the most foolhardy risk that could be taken in order to solve an internal issue of voting gridlock. For some, winning is obviously more important than the long-term security of the Religio Romana.

Not content with exposing the Collegium to the possibility of hostile interference, the author has included a raft of duties and functions that are largely impossible to fulfill. This legalistic role-play is exactly the sort of example that the opponents of Nova Roma’s legal system have seized on in the past.

Normally one would have expected these well known Luddites to heap derision on this long-winded shopping list of theoretical priestly duties, but so far they are silent. Since the aim of this “reform” is to allow one faction in the Collegium total victory over its opponents, the normal objections have of course been shelved.

What a classic example of Nova Roman power politics at its best, and better still this long and dreary suicide note is to be tacked onto the already discredited Constitution.

The ungodly married to the unspeakable in pursuit of the unattainable.

Trick and no treat

2006-09-30T05:33:00.002-06:00

Its that time of year when juveniles dress up as monsters and the cries of "trick or treat" ring out. Sadly here in Nova Roma the cry is "trick and no treat". Yes, its election time!

Recall those parties as a child when the fat little monster turned up and when offered one cookie grabbed the whole plate and ran off into the corner? You know, the sort of child that could have ended up under a mountain in the dark, whispering about his "precious"? Here in Nova Roma of course we have no rings of power, just another pointy hat to add to a burgeoning collection.

Hickory, dickory, dot!,
The consuls promised a lot.
Hickory, dickory, dot!,
The votes they got,
Then they ditched the lot.
Hickory, dickory, dot!

The question is who got egged in the face? Us or them?

Sawing into freedom

2006-08-28T02:00:00.002-06:00

I recently read on one particular Yahoo list the varied views of a small selection of new citizens. The old saw about the rough and tumble nature of the Main List surfaced. The Main List is our forum, and as such it is open to all. Since Nova Roma is a community many issues will be debated there and yes, frequently they involve politics and law, which can certainly evoke heated debates.

An experiment was once tried, where no one posted on any topic concerning those two categories. This was meant to encourage the free flow of debate and discussion on higher and nobler subjects, such as art, literature, poetry, history etc. The result? Very few people posted and there was certainly no renaissance that flowered in place of all these apparently ghastly and verbally bloody debates.

The day that we stop debating politics and law on the Main List is the day we hand over control of Nova Roma to the intellectual elite, or at least to those that consider themselves such.

An intellectual oligarchy would be as much as an anathema to the concept of a res publica as rule by one man.

Reform and the Religio

2006-05-27T00:10:00.004-06:00

The proposed legislation to reform the activities of the priestly colleges of Nova Roma has, as I predicted, seen the light of day on the Main List and the key theme is accountability. The Pontifex Maximus is accountable for individual members of the religious colleges, while the latter will be accountable as well, for actions and research. Much of this proposal appears to be grounded in tradition and for that alone we should be grateful.

Practicality however has to run parallel with tradition. If it is not practical to introduce “X”, then enshrining it in a law that can lay such a proposal open to the allegations that it is another example of role-playing, regardless of how traditional or accurate it is. That can be true, but equally it can be a precipitate charge and in this case clearly the intention is to provide a framework for further debate and subsequent decisions over the exact meaning of sections and terminology. For example referring to temples would appear to be precipitate, but as was pointed out to me, the relevant religious colleges could decide the exact definition of a temple later. Can a temple be a virtual one? Do we define a temple as including the activities associated with a physical structure? Good questions that would hopefully be sensibly answered after serious debate.

A potential problem arises in that this proposal must be rendered into a lex and a constitutional amendment. As most of us in Nova Roma know, at least those of us who care to honestly admit it, the constitution is a deeply flawed document that cannot be lawfully interpreted, though many will simply ignore that fact and attempt to drive their own interpretations into practical effect.

Therefore imprecision in language or conceptual vagueness, not to mention an absence of definitions can unwittingly create a legal void. A interpretational void in a lex, where the meaning is unclear can sometimes be legitimately filled by edicts, although in the long term it would of course be better to reduce the number of these voids by crafting the lex in a precise manner to begin with. Edicts have a finite lifespan and unless they are renewed by successive magistrates they die, and so too will the interpretations they contain. Edicts are an excellent instrument by which to resolve emergent unforeseen problems. In this case the intention I assume is that the religious colleges will issue decreta to “flesh out” the skeletal structure before us. Then again perhaps this duty will not fall to either of the Colleges and the reason for that supposition lies in the nature of the proposal and comments made on the Main List.

The Nova Roman constitution, as it stands, protects any decreta issued by either of the two religious colleges from being overruled by “any laws passed in the comitia or a Senatus consultum”. However that is a reactive clause that first requires a decretum be issued and then an attempt be made to negate it before this protective clause comes into play. If this law is to be effective a constitutional change will be necessary, a fact already acknowledged on the Main List by Gnaeus Salvius Astur. Additionally Astur writes, in respect of one section of the proposal, that “it reestablishes the role of the Senate as the highest responsible body for the Sacra Publica”. From this one has to deduce that at the very least Section 1.B. of the constitution, that notorious section on legal precedence, together with sections VI.B.1 and VI.B.2.a will have to be overturned.

Having removed the protection currently afforded to the religious colleges and placed the ultimate control of Sacra Publica in the hands of the Senate, that body through a Senatus consultum can be the ones to put flesh onto the bones of this skeletal proposal, one assumes in consultation with the one or both of the colleges, but there will be no evident mandated requirement to do so. In other words the balance of power in respect of the Sacra publica will be stripped from the colleges and placed into the hands of the Senate. So to me it appears that one possible scenario, should this proposal pass into law and the constitution be changed, is that the Senate will define those elements of the Sacra publica, relegating the colleges to issuing decreta on purely internal matters pertaining only to the mechanics of college affairs. While this may be said to be historically accurate, it is also extremely fraught practically speaking, and we should all consider the consequences quite carefully.

The Senate is not just comprised of practitioners of the Religio privata. It contains, as does Nova Roma, people of many different religious faiths and possibly those who have no faith at all. It is by nature a secular body and a political one too. Nova Roman politics can be quite “intense”, to say the least and while that, to me, is a healthy state of affairs it also inevitably results in quite polarized differences of opinion, compounded by personal likes and dislikes.

The Senate therefore can be said to be quite an accurate reconstruction of its late republican ancestor. The fundamental difference lies in the fact that it contains many people who are not practitioners of the Religio privata and have no intention of ever becoming one. Moreover those people have not grown up in a society utterly drenched in the traditions and ceremonies of the Religio publica. Few practitioners of the Religio privata have either, being “converts” later in life, but they do have their beliefs as a yardstick against which to judge proposals.

By contrast non-practitioners will have to approach such a judgement from a logical analysis, rather than an emotive one. Some may say that that is a better approach, but the Religio publica means, obviously, far more to a practitioner than a non-practitioner. The latter can genuinely afford it respect but the emotive “fall-out” of a proposed Senatus consultum, or in a wider sense a lex, can utterly escape them. This is not a deficiency on their part, but a simple result of a lack of emotional investment in the Religio, be it privata or publica.

Religious belief of all sorts involves an emotional investment to fully appreciate, for example, the deep significance of rituals. One can appreciate their historical importance and even take a reasonable stab at grasping the current importance attached to them, but I would suggest that the full religious importance of a Hindu ritual will not be experienced by an atheist, any more than a Christian can fully appreciate the Religio publica and privata. Respect and emotional intuitive understanding are two different concepts.

Therefore if the true significance of proposals that affect the Religio publica are to be grasped by non-practitioners, regardless of what positions they hold in Nova Roma, it is absolutely essential that the views of the religious colleges are invited and respected. The moment that the view of the majority of the Senate is in conflict with the view of the majority of one or both of the colleges constitutes a very dangerous flashpoint. Legally the Senate will be able to impose its view, but it would do so at grave risk at exacerbating the evident dislocation that a number of practitioners evidently feel, given the views expressed on the Main List and elsewhere.

There is a feeling abroad that Nova Roma currently has very little to do with the strengthening of the Religio publica, and there is the continuing risk that the majority of practitioners that remain will end up being polarized in the view that they are an isolated and endangered group within Nova Roma whose voice is paid little heed. That could all too easily develop into an open, continuing and very fractious conflict.

So we will be dependant on the good sense of the Senate to fully involve the colleges and defer to their views if, as a secular body, it wishes to preserve the religious peace in Nova Roma. As it will be legally the supreme decision maker there can be no checks or balances that prevent it from deviating from the views of the colleges, for obviously that would result in it no longer being supreme.

Indeed the Senate could elect to dismiss the views of the colleges as unrepresentative of the views of practitioners based on its “analysis” of the situation. The members of the Senate are fallible and prone to the same human failings we all are, and those personal and ideological divides that clearly place individual Senators at odds with each other, so much so that they could reasonably be described as personal enemies, could influence the “analysis” of a proposal that affects the Religio publica, compounded by the fact that a number of the protagonists are not practitioners of the Religio privata.

Therefore this legislative proposal with voids of this sort, combined with relegating the religious colleges to what is inevitably a legally subordinate role, and the existence of personal animosities, makes for a volatile mix. It maybe alleged to be historically accurate but practically it is exceptionally risky. Since the Senate is not a static body, changes in its membership may further increase the risk of a breakdown of what can only be a “gentleman’s agreement” to rely on the advice of the religious colleges to guide the decision making process of the Senate.

Further, what happens if the Senate elects to support a minority, rather than majority, view of the colleges? Legally, nothing but again practically the consequences could be disastrous. At a time of its nascent development, is it appropriate to place the final authority for the Religio publica in the hands of a secular body, not all of whose members are practitioners of the Religio privata?

This proposal could under ideal circumstances work, and work reasonably well, but the provision relating to electing the Pontifex Maximus is in my opinion utterly unwise and should be struck. I equally believe that the risks to religious peace in Nova Roma are too great to place the Senate in a dominant role over the Religio publica. The remainder of the proposals have merit, although again there are elements that are currently impractical at face value and would require more detailed definition. Should that definition be left solely to the religious colleges I would rest more easily, as I suspect would many others of all shades of “political” opinion.

After carefully considering its provisions I respect its attempt at historical accuracy, I hope that the motivation for this proposal was to enhance the Religio publica and not emasculate a faction within the Collegium Pontificum, and I am concerned that the fundamental shift in responsibility will make the Religio publica and the Religio in general even more of a battleground than it has been in the past.

For this proposal to work, it will require, in my estimation, an immense amount of good faith, trust, respect and adherence to an unwritten rule that the views of the colleges will be heeded and not contradicted. I am far from hopeful that all these conditions will come into alignment and remain so.

And yet another theory on Jesus

2006-05-22T03:48:00.000-06:00

Jesus, son of Roman soldier?

After The Da Vinci Code, which upset many Christians with its premise that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and fathered a child, would anyone dare make even more shocking claims? This author does and he’s no fiction writer but a respected historian

THE JESUS DYNASTY
The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity
By James D. Tabor
Publisher: Simon & Schuster, 384 pages
(ISBN: 0-743-28723-1)

Review by Dr NG KAM WENG
AT first glance, The Jesus Dynasty seems like another dubious book cashing in on the notoriety of Dan Brown’s best-seller The Da Vinci Code. However, a quick perusal of the book will dispel this notion, given the academic credentials of the author, James Tabor. Tabor comes across as an archaeologist who has patiently collected and coordinated solid evidence to support his bold thesis. The Jesus Dynasty bears the marks of a well-researched academic book.

At the outset, the book argues for an alternative history of the origins of the Christian faith in Jesus the Messiah. Some of its provocative theses include the following:

1) There was no Virgin Birth. Mary, the mother of Jesus was either seduced or raped by a Roman soldier named Pantera (whose grave Tabor allegedly found in Germany). This claim, if true, would shatter Christian faith considerably.

2) Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist, from whom he got his understanding of the Messianic vocation. John and Jesus took on the role of Jewish Messiahs and preached the coming of the Kingdom of God amidst political turmoil. Jesus included his four blood brothers in the Council of the Twelve, which he formed in anticipation of his success in establishing the Kingdom of God on earth.

3) Christianity traditionally identifies the “beloved” disciple as John. Not so, says Tabor. It was actually James, Jesus’ brother. After Jesus was crucified by the Romans, his brother James – the “Beloved Disciple” – took over the leadership of the Jesus Dynasty and ruled for 30 years, although to say “ruled” might be an exaggeration since he had no more than a motley band of impoverished, persecuted Christians in his charge.

In short, Tabor claims that, “Jesus by age thirty functions as head of the household and forges a vital role for his brothers, who succeed him in establishing a Messianic Dynasty destined to change the world” (page 81). In this regard, both Tabor and Brown promote the conspiracy theory that the Church continues to suppress the truth of history out of vested interests.

more...

Link

Roman treasure to stay in Bristol

2006-05-22T03:44:00.000-06:00

Thousands of Roman coins will go on permanent display in Bristol after the city's museum was awarded £22,500 of lottery money. The hoard of 11,460 coins - the third largest found in the UK - was unearthed in 2004 by a gardener in Thornbury.

Since the discovery, Bristol Museum has been seeking cash to put the copper and silver alloy coins on display.

Grants totalling more than £40,000 have now been raised to keep the coins, which date back to AD 270, in Bristol.

"We are delighted that the coin hoard is able to remain in Bristol and are able to give the public access to one of the most exciting finds in this area," said Kate Brindley, director of Bristol's museums, galleries and archives.

Baalbek Roman-era treasures

2006-04-22T21:00:00.000-06:00

Baalbek excavations unearth Roman-era treasures
Artifacts found in Unusual Burial structure shed light
on long-lost traditions

By Rym Ghazal Daily Star staff
Friday, April 21, 2006

BEIRUT/BAALBEK: A pair of beetle-shaped gold earrings, finger-sized glass flasks, glass and bronze rings, scattered gold leafs - some twisted into the shape of a mouth or eyes - iron nails, and remains of skeletons were just some of the "treasures" recently unearthed in Baalbek from Roman-era burial caves - each piece carrying its own tale from the past.

Burial sites and the artifacts found within have been the "most critical records of the past," - shedding light on long lost practices and traditions.

"We just keep dipping into a paradise of treasures from the Roman-era," said archaeologist Khaled al-Rifai, who heads the archeological team sent by the "General Antiques Department" to accompany the construction company working on a sewage network in Baalbek because of its archaeological importance, and who have been making headlines this month with their series of discoveries of Roman-era treasures dating from the 2nd or 3rd century AD.

more...

Link

Instant Vision Fertilization

2006-04-04T01:08:00.001-06:00

Our two Consuls have just nine months left in which to produce a vision for Nova Roma and they now need a premature birth in order that they have sufficient time to smack some life into it. So far the sum total of the year has been a botched attempt to circumvent the Collegium Pontificum and, currently, the latest attempt at resolving the methodology for resigning from citizenship and/or office in Nova Roma.

Some of us of course still remain unconvinced that “I quit” needs a Byzantine depth of officialdom and rubber-stamping to occur before we are all allowed to “officially” recognize that yet another horse has bolted out of the stable. In fact by the time this tortuous process is complete our escaping horse will probably have lived a full life, expired and been boiled down for glue.

It remains unclear if the vision that may yet be born has actually even been conceived and which of the two prospective parents will carry this wonder child. Maybe they are planning the gynecological equivalent of pass-the-parcel, where each of them has a turn at baking this baby to full term, or they may elect for just one of them to play mommy. Certainly there are no evident signs that conception has occurred, as neither of them looks the least bit swollen with one iota of an idea, let alone an embryonic vision.

Possibly the relative silence from Mommy and Daddy can be explained by visits to the IVF clinic, otherwise known as Instant Vision Fertilization. It could be that at this very moment a white clad and masked technician is inserting a horse sized syringe up a nose. Thousands of tadpole tailed little bursts of inspiration could be surging and coursing upwards, desperately swimming against time, trying to reach a gray barely pulsating cranial egg, before they expire from exhaustion.

If we are lucky one of them may finish this marathon and burrow deep enough to cause a neuron to fire. On the other hand, it may all just dribble back down and out of the nostril, so I’m not rushing out yet to buy a gift for their baby shower.

In fact there may not be enough stock in the Idea Bank to handle this gargantuan task.

The power of fear

2006-02-18T21:27:00.001-07:00

The debate has commenced again over two related issues, the Constitution and potential threats to the Religio Romana.

Those in favour of the retaining a rigid Constitution that occupies a position of superiority in the hierarchy of legal authorities claim that fire walling Nova Roma with this document is necessary in order to preserve the Religio and the principal organs of the state, such as the Senate.

Those that believe, myself among them, that the Constitution should not be legally dominant contend that it fails to deliver the requisite protection claimed by its supporters, and instead is often both the catalyst and focus of intractable problems and serious discord.

The Constitution was an understandable effort at the creation of Nova Roma to provide a substitute for an established and powerful mos maiorum. It was seen as necessary to enshrine in a legal document sufficient constraints that would serve as legal, rather than socio-political, brakes against any efforts to disestablish the Religio or tamper with the basic organs of a Roman republic.

That effort, however laudable, not only laid the seeds for the seemingly endless examples of the failure of the Constitution to live up to its inherent purpose, but also has created the very discord that it sought to protect against.

The Constitution establishes itself as the supreme legal authority, with the exception of a dictator or in more limited scope the Senate acting under the authority of a Senatus consultum ultimum. It does not allow for anyone to interpret it and thus what is written has to be applied literally, and not bent to the shape that those influential enough to ignore logic and reason demand. Because the wording is often muddled and the underlying concepts poorly thought through, the result of any application of those sections is a precursor to a fractious debate.

The Constitution is an utterly inappropriate medium to capture the social and political mores of republican Rome. In large part these were unwritten conventions, the application of which would inevitably be driven by the prevailing political and military dictates of the day. There would be occasions when the Senate no doubt was comfortable with ignoring the established mos maiorum.

Only a fraction of the debates and issues have survived the passage of history, and not all would have been classed as momentous or critical. Consequently it is logical to assume that there may well have been occasions when the Senate conveniently forgot about the mos maiorum, for the sake of expediency.

Trying to circumvent the Constitution is, if one is to be intellectually honest, virtually impossible where it is clear and unequivocal, and thus trying to represent it as an alternative to the mos maiorum is conversely fundamentally dishonest. Now of course one could argue that it is as possible to change the Constitution as it was the mos maiorum. Certainly the similarities at a very high level of analysis are apparent. Both enshrine the prevailing “sacred cows” of the day and both can be changed, albeit with difficulty. There is a fundamental difference between the two however that concerns the rationale for creating and preserving both.

The mos maiorum was generally speaking the accepted limitations or usage of law, power, economics, in fact all aspects that affected the life of a Roman, in particular those at the more influential end of the social spectrum. The mos maiorum probably had more significance and importance to a resident of the Palatine, than an insula dweller in the Subura. It was a collection of customs that had proved acceptable to those in power, and to those who on occasions had harnessed the latent power of Rome’s masses.

Some aspects of the mos maiorum seem eminently sensible; others can only be explained rationally by reference to the self-interests of a powerful, yet small, elite. It comprised the most fundamental with the most specific and narrow of concepts, some of which dated back to the birth of the res publica. Other parts were the consequences of more recent struggles. It was a veritable bazaar of rules, jumbled, muddled and thoroughly Roman, the end product of years of trial and error, compromise and practicality. It included principles so basic to the Roman character that one could not imagine a republic without them.

By contrast the Nova Roman constitution is meant to serve at least four functions. Firstly it is meant to serve as the bylaws of Nova Roma Inc., the US corporate entity that underpins the day-to-day activities of Nova Roma the Republic. This can be dealt with by stating that the laws of Nova Roma form the bylaws of the corporation. Secondly, it is meant to be the protective shield that ensures the survival of the Religio Publica specifically and the Religio in an encompassing sense. Thirdly, it provides the framework for the government of Nova Roma and fourthly it guarantees certain rights to the citizen body.

These are fundamental core concepts inscribed in the e-waves of the Internet. The social attitudes of the day as reflected in the political or administrative life of Nova Roma are not present, for these would prove to be difficult to distil into a comprehensive and by nature necessarily limited document.

For example there is a currently a determined effort in the Censor’s office of Cn. Equitius Marinus to improve the quality of names granted to new citizens and to gently encourage existing ones with names that flout Roman naming conventions to change them. Much of these efforts have been reduced to the form of laws, in order that we all gain clarity of understanding and in order, no doubt, to add a permanency to the process.

In Nova Roma this may be necessary, but in Ancient Rome it was the natural order, not a law. People then did not need a law to govern their choices when naming their children, social custom governed them. The laws in Nova Roma speak to the processes, while the mos maiorum would have spoken to the higher-level facts, not the minutiae of administration within the Censor’s office. The Constitution, and indeed any law, compels compliance, whereas the mos maiorum inspired it. It was an unwritten code devised and enforced by the social elite and complied with by people who were proud to be Roman. Many would have considered it untenable to flout the directives of the greatest in the land, quite simply un-Roman.

The power of the mos maiorum lay in this appeal to the patriotism of all Romans, and in a class delineated society, the desire to fit in and to climb the social ladder. Attempting to tamper with the mos maiorum would have led to, at the very least, political suicide and sometimes, as the brothers Gracchi discovered, physical death. The Romans would have scoffed at the need to enshrine certain basics, such as the structure of government, in a law. During the glory days of the Republic the fact that there should always be a Senate was so widely and completely accepted that a law would have been redundant.

The critics of abolishing the constitution will claim that as we in Nova Roma are years from this form of compliance it is absolutely necessary to create, maintain and protect a Constitution. This however precludes the evident result that what is included in that document will never substitute for the mos maiorum, due in no small part to the limitations of the law.

Law requires a precision of language that would render the translation of the mos maiorum into a shadow of itself. Since it was unwritten and instilled in the future policy makers throughout their formative years, by example as well as by instruction, the definition and interpretation of the mos maiorum varied, but the underlying concepts were general enough to ensure a commonality of compliance.

For example, the law might say, “A is defined as X and must exist within the confines of Y, except where condition Z exists. Failure to obey the content of A will cause result B to occur.” Since those parts of the mos maiorum that were unwritten could never achieve the clarity that the law could, at least in its most theoretical state, a verbal explanation of “A” would probably be a simple statement linked to the historical circumstances surrounding its creation.

My interpretation of what “A” is will not necessarily be that of the next person, and the description of its historical setting could be substantially different. The result was compliance with core concepts and divergence over the details, with the consequence that when circumstances arose that brought this aspect of the mos maiorum into focus, there would likely have been a general acceptance of the principle but debate over the applicability of the details.

This ensured the relevance of the mos maiorum and allowed for a gradual erosion of parts of it that could not be maintained in the face of external forces. The principle could still be acknowledged as valid and desirable, but the practicalities of the moment could gently push the untenable part to one side. This model of change would have been most applicable to reasoned debates within the Senate. Change initiated by the people could be more dramatic and in the latter years of the republic, violent.

Trying to achieve the same result through codification in a law will be a hopeless task. The details of the topic are rendered fixed and immutable, while the underlying principle is probably not even described. Even if some form of preliminary introduction is included, cementing the details in concrete form makes the likelihood of debate over relevance very remote. If it does occur, particularly in the context of the Constitution, it can only be as a debate over the general desirability of the section in question, rather than its applicability to the issue of the moment.

The absolute nature of the law will terminate discussion, for the law is the law and compliance is mandatory. Any attempts, even with the best of motives, to deviate from that principle will result in similar attempts being made in circumstances where there is no overwhelming consensus to ignore a law. Laws have to be strictly adhered to, where no ambiguity in the drafting exists, for to do otherwise invites contempt for the rule of law and ultimately anarchy.

Clearly if the Constitution is not to grow so ridiculously large that it becomes useless as a body of law, there is a limit to how much of what would normally be part of the mos maiorum could be included in it. Equally the level of detail and explanation must be similarly curtailed. The end product must therefore be a document that has only the most transitory relevance as a vessel containing the social, political and legal mores of Nova Roma.

These facts ensure an unhealthy dependency on an inferior product, with limited ability to affect change. The duality of voting and the majority needed to change the Constitution make this a tedious and slow process. Historically in issues of policy the Senate could elect to follow the mos maiorum or adopt a new course, whereas in Nova Roma this flexibility is absent.

For the mos maiorum to assume its fundamental characteristic of constancy, change could not be affected lightly, so while I make reference to its ability to change (due partly to it being largely unwritten), it should not be inferred that such changes were regular or frivolous. That said, we in Nova Roma have a process that has subverted the traditional role of the mos maiorum, with a foundation resting on concrete absolutes set in a framework that is cumbersome, focused solely on process, relying on the dictates of modern constitutional law and drafted in a restrictive yet not definitive manner.

This brings into focus the claim that is starting to surface as a defence for the continued existence of the Constitution, that its substitution for the mos maiorum is only necessary until such point as the citizen body as a whole has clearly developed a sense of Romanitas to the degree necessary to be able to competently understand, respect and abide by the mos maiorum. This is an approach which can be characterized as a “Nanny’s Charter”, where control is deemed necessary in order to prevent opportunistic magistrates from herding the voting populace into courses of action aimed at dismantling Nova Roma’s structure and disestablishing the Religio. For this latter reason to be a valid reason for maintaining a Constitution four sets of general circumstances would have to exist in a post-constitution Nova Roma.

Firstly, it would presuppose that the voting population in the upper level centuries, consisting particularly of those who had given service to Nova Roma in positions of central and provincial responsibility, would be swayed into dismantling a fundamental part of the Republic. What makes it so unlikely is that the people who would have to vote in favour would have owed their advancement to the system and to individuals who in all likelihood would be sitting in the Senate or the Collegium Pontificum. While of course not clients of their “sponsors”, there would still be an influence that could be legitimately brought to bear on them. Additionally such a “revolution” would be unlikely to begin from within the system, among those that have served and benefited from it. Thus it remains only a theoretical possibility, not a credible one.

Secondly, it is based on the supposition that there is either a deliberate “plot” to undermine the Religio Publica or at best a dismissive and negligent attitude exhibited towards it survival. The sad truth is that the Religio Publica, as distinct from the Collegium Pontificum, doesn’t merit any determined plot because its pulse and respiration can be barely measured.

Why would a gang of rabid Christian zealots waste time trying to eradicate what to all intents is practically dead anyway? To do so would in fact be to their disadvantage as such a policy may generate sympathy and support for the Religio Publica. As to the existence of a negligent attitude, that undoubtedly does exist, in part due to the very determined political efforts that have been made in recent years to oust the strict conservative reconstructionists from the Collegium Pontificum.

Thirdly, it presupposes that no veto would be interposed. This is highly unlikely. A rogue Consul would have his colleague’s veto to contend with, as well as the Tribuncian veto. Two rogue Consuls would still have to contend with the Tribunes. Even allowing for the Consuls and Tribunes being in league, the Senate would have to sit idly by and not pass the Senatus consultum ultimum or appoint a Dictator. If all these normal checks and balances failed, then once again the people would have to vote for it.

Fourthly, this assumes that influential supporters of the Religio would not be canvassing support to defeat such a measure. Clearly under these circumstances the Religio as a whole, or at the very least the Religio Publica, would have lost all support in Nova Roma. While the Collegium Pontificum may come under scrutiny and criticism, this is in large part due to political and personal differences. To destroy the Religio Publica in order to destroy the Collegium Pontificum is a step that is barely credible as a policy and highly unlikely to command support, for to amputate one’s head to cure a headache is ridiculous.

The desire, of those adherents of the Religio opposed to repealing the Constitution, to maintain the firewall provided by it is very understandable, but totally misguided. The Constitution can be changed. The Senate could also see its composition and thus its prevailing views changed. The Constitution can only offer limited protection, and if like the Maginot Line a future “enemy” simply circumvents these limited protections, then defeat is inevitable.

If there were a total failure of the checks and balances listed in the four factors above, then the protection afforded by the Constitution would also be totally overwhelmed. It is far more likely that the normal protections, as opposed to constitutional ones, would simply eradicate the threat before it was ever necessary to rely on the Senate’s 2/3rd majority provision. If the four fail, then the constitutional protection will also have inevitably failed. Thus the Constitution is a paper tiger and utterly unnecessary to defend the primacy of the Religio. With or without the Constitution the Religio will have the same chances of survival, no greater or smaller.

If then the Constitution can never deliver more protection than the normal checks and balances, and in fact is likely to do less, and it can never act as even a poor substitute for the mos maiorum, what then is the reason for keeping it?

There is only one rational explanation, namely that the power elite in Nova Roma has little to no faith in its citizens. Those that cleave so passionately and desperately to the Constitution obviously have little trust in the people in whose name they exercise their “authority”.

For some this is rooted in the hostile attitude that elements of this modern world show towards their beliefs. It is an entirely understandable reaction to being marginalized and persecuted for over 1,700 years. They have absolutely no reason to place their trust in those that don’t share that faith, and yet they stand to loose everything if they do not.

For the others, the seekers of power and titles, they are utterly beyond the power of rational debate or logic. They cannot see that people become citizens because they are fascinated with Ancient Rome, and have been delighted to discover Nova Roma. Instead they view every new member as a potential fifth columnist, presumed guilty until they prove their allegiance to the power bloc of the day. They pay no heed to the fact that a new citizen or even groupings of citizens who have been here years have little voting power if they haven’t accumulated the required century points. Certainly the small amount they have and the likelihood that they are capite censi, relegates most new citizens to the ranks of the lower centuries and/or the urban tribes. They pose no threat to Nova Roma, so reference to plots, potential plots, misguided voters, the influence of rogue magistrates are all smokescreens to hide behind.

The simple truth is that the secular power elite has no reason to fear or suspect the people, but everything to loose, in their own eyes, by having faith in them. The further one climbs the greasy pole of power in Nova Roma, the more likely that one is to be contaminated by this nonsense. It all seems so rational of course, the benevolent wise ones ministering to the intellectually unwashed and misguided. The refrain of all elites, of despots and dictators has echoed through the ages, and shadows of it can even be seen here in Nova Roma. This attitude could be best summarized by this, as yet, imaginary address:

“Citizens, leave it to your betters to decide what is best for the state, for there are dark forces gathering and waiting to strike at the heart of our Republic. Place your trust in us and in the Constitution!”

There is no gathering storm in Nova Roma and there never has been, nor is it likely that there ever would be. At our current rate of growth we are simply insignificant and not worth the bother. One would have to be a very shortsighted anarchist that expended time and effort infiltrating Nova Roma, and a very under-employed religious zealot that sought to destroy the Religio.

There will never be a time in the future when the citizen body is developed enough to allow for the mos maiorum to play a full part in the life of Nova Roma, nor will there ever be an optimum time for the “ordinary” law to regain its place in the legal chain of authority, for the people to be trusted enough to be given the ultimate authority through the law to decide their own fate, for better or worse. Why? Because the power elites of Nova Roma will never judge that those times have come, for their agenda is one of tight and limited control. They mouth the phrase that the people of Nova Roma are supreme, but they invest no energy in trusting the people and yet plenty in constraining them through the Constitution.

The Constitution is just one method of “control” amongst many. Maybe its adherents really on some level believe the myths about its protective power, but then again after the sad experience of Tiberius Galerius Paulinus in his failed attempt to claim his right of provocatio, who but a charlatan, a mountebank, a carpetbagger, could delude themselves that the Constitution is anything other than a means to prevent the people from determining their own destiny?

What is at stake in Nova Roma for so long as we have the Constitution is freedom and respect. Each day that the Constitution remains in force is another day of shame. A shame that those powerful elites are so insecure in their paltry positions of “power”, with all the built in restraints and checks that they have at their disposal, that they refuse to grant the people the right to choose that destiny.

Each day that the Religio Publica hides under the skirts of the Constitution, and its adherents lack the courage necessary to take it out into the open, to convince, to persuade, to be proud, to be an integral part of Nova Roma rather than some sickly child that has to be kept in its room out of the sunlight, is another day that demeans those who follow the path of the Religio.

Enough of hiding in the dark, let us understand a simple truth, that if the majority of the people reject the Religio Publica, and even the Religio as a whole, then it cannot survive, Constitution or no Constitution. The longer the Religio remains trapped by its past and fearful of the future, the more likely that it will suffer a slow death through increasing irrelevance to the life of Nova Roma. The Constitution is an impediment to its potential and future growth, because it promotes a siege mentality. Trapped in a far from gilded cage, the Religio will wither and die. It is time to release it.

Likewise release the people from the shackles of the Constitution and treat them as the adults that they are. Have faith in them, for if you have no faith and instead fear the consequences, they will repay you with an equal amount of distrust and hostility.

Be vigilant by all means and be prepared for the unlikely, but ultimately believe in Nova Roma by believing in the common sense of the people to be given the power to legislate at will, unfettered by the tarnished chains of the Constitution.

Believe also that they have the capacity to learn enough about Roman society that they can follow the mos maiorum. Do this now, for now is as good a time as any to begin to build Nova Roma from within. No better time will come and unless we do this soon, all that awaits Nova Roma is a slow and painful death through all-consuming fear and lack of growth as a Roman citizen body.

We can either ascend to heights only dictated by our willingness to go further, or we can plumb the depths and eventually disappear from view completely into the abyss of irrelevance.

I choose the heights. What do you choose?

Dyrrhachium or Pharsalus?

2006-01-21T04:08:00.001-07:00

In an earlier post, “The Barge of the Dead”, I commented on the fact that there wasn’t any actual “work” for our citizens. It appears that the Consuls of this year have responded to this dire state of unemployment, and particular credit for this act of social welfare must go to Modianus. He has taken eleven citizens, which equates to 4.6% of our taxpayers, into the fold of his paternal toga making them his Accensi, thereby relieving the state of any responsibility for keeping them occupied and off the streets.

Before you jump to the wrong conclusion that these are mere ragamuffins, left to wander our republic bereft of support, let me point out that four of them are consulars and former censors, five are senators and two are propraetors. No ordinary waifs and strays here, no residents of the Subura need apply. A number of them hail from Nova Roma’s Palatine. This is a powerhouse of support for our Senior Consul, and if they are all actively involved in giving him advice, his ears must be dinned. These intellectual praetorians will no doubt be deployed at the first hint of a crisis, and if between them they can’t avert it, surely the end-of-days must have come upon us.

I await, in eager anticipation with stopwatch in hand, the advent of such a calamity. How long will it take from the first appearance of trouble to its eradication? Will there be a stampede of eminent personages togas flying, racing into our virtual forum to confront and strike down the problem? Can Modianus restrain these seasoned war-horses from galloping to the sound of battle, or will his posterior, up-ended, be the last we see of him as they trample over him?

It must have seemed eminently sensible to Modianus to recruit these heavyweights into his corner, for with their degree of influence in various quarters of Nova Roma, his consular path would be far less rocky. At first glance it seems very advantageous to have a wealth of experience at one’s disposal. The reality of the situation may prove somewhat more vexing, for Modianus is a newly promoted general in a tent full of Field Marshals.

The problem arises in the strength of some of their characters and firmly established beliefs. These men are not wallflowers and even if they remain publicly silent the assumption is that there will be many private discussions taking place. It is during the course of these that one asks oneself whether Modianus will be allowed to play with the big boys? Worse still, even if he is the master of his own destiny, will anyone actually believe that?

Now of course these eminent Accensi have too much couth to deliberately eclipse our Senior Consul, but given their wealth of experience it will be hard to judge over the course of the year whether Modianus is leading or being led. His noble Accensi could all take an infinite number of oaths swearing that Modianus is the general in his own tent, and I would accept their word that they truly do believe this, but even they may not understand how their opinions, both individually and combined, are affecting the resolve of Modianus to steer an independent course.

The job of an Accensus is of course to offer advice and any Consul would be wise to listen to it, but ultimately he must balance that advice against his own convictions. The more advice one seeks and the more varying the opinions, the more complex the decision-making formula becomes. That difficulty factor increases exponentially the greater the auctoritas of the Accensi providing it. The final exponent in the formula is that relating to the personal relationships existing between Consul and individual Accensi. A strong friendship can inadvertently lend itself to extra weight being attached to opinions, more so than they may deserve if viewed dispassionately. It requires a strong character to master these complexities.

So if a crisis does erupt, the speed of Modianus’ response maybe reduced. If that speed slows to a crawl it maybe hard for some of his Accensi to resist the temptation to take matters into their own hands and cure the problem. Equally if such dithering continues on other occasions these Accensi will have to try to speed up Modianus’ response without eliminating the advice of their less experienced colleagues in the cohors, or becoming Gepetto the puppet master.

If by contrast Modianus tries to assert himself by making fast decisions, especially if they fly in the face of the advice of his noble Accensi, he needs to make the right choices if he is to retain their continuing support and involvement, for there is a danger in stuffing the command tent so full and then ignoring the advice offered.

Modianus will need to constantly assert himself if he is not to become Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus:

"… Although his feelings of anger were justified he nevertheless concealed them and from hesitation and fear held his tongue, like a man no longer giving the orders, but receiving them and forced to act in every respect against his better judgment. Such was the extent of the despondency that overwhelmed this man…" Appian, Civil War, II, 65.

The lesson is clear, and the similarities with the position of Pompeius Magnus are striking. If one is to truly exercise command one needs to ensure that one has a unique vision, a competent plan, that advice is sought in measured quantities, that one possesses both the capacity and authority to make decisions in an expeditious yet prudent manner and that one commands both the loyalty and support of advisors.

We will have to wait and see whether Modianus can meet this acid test, or whether he goes down on his own field of Pharsalus. Since he now occupies the curule chair, albeit by default, we better hope for all our sakes, and the future of Nova Roma, that this man is up to the task. It will benefit none of us if defeated he disguises himself and quits his camp for a life of exile.

Failing that, we better hope for a very quiet and uneventful year.

Arms against a sea of troubles?

2006-01-03T22:55:00.001-07:00

It will be interesting to see the volume of legislation introduced to the people by our new consuls. Fabius Buteo has always been sceptical of the need for volumes of laws and his appointment of Marcus Octavius Germanicus as accensus should mean that an even more doughty foe of needless laws will bolster Fabius Buteo’s resolve.

It will be equally interesting to see what legislation, if any, his colleague P. Minucia-Tiberia Strabo throws her weight behind. She is probably less fettered by previous pronouncements decrying excessive legislation, and one suspects already has a draft agenda prepared. In her declaration of candidacy she stated, “reforms might be merited to prevent unnecessary alienation of those seeking the counsel and example of the CP.”

If the declarations of candidates’ intentions mean more in Nova Roma than they do in the macronational world, then this would appear to be a clear indication that the rudiments of a plan have already been devised. Yet in the same declaration she says “I leave these issues in the hands of the Pontifices”.

To observers of the Nova Roman “political” scene this means that she will leave the promulgation of reforms to those pontifices that would favour such measures and once they have secured a majority vote in the Collegium Pontificum they will no doubt take that result to Strabo for the introduction of, or support for, legislation. Even if they remain in the minority they could still ask for the matter to be put to the people. What would that legislation be?

The answer can probably be found in the attempts in 2757 to promote legislation to have pontifices elected rather than appointed. As the numbers stack up in the Collegium one could predict a slight majority in favour of the more conservative element likely to oppose such moves. As it is highly unlikely that they will willingly allow the balance of power in the Collegium to be eroded by the appointment of new pontifices more in tune with the “reformers”, one assumes they will block any such attempts.

In this event the only solution of course for the “reformers” would be to see one or more of the conservative pontifices leave Nova Roma or be removed as citizens, for once they surrender or are stripped of their citizenship they could not be members of the Collegium. An alternative strategy was publicly promulgated by the Pontifex Maximus, namely one of cooperation with the conservative block on issues which all the pontifices agree need to be resolved, which is a sensible and practical alternative.

As the Pontifex Maximus is also an accensus of Buteo, does this mean that the latter also favours this approach, or does it mean that both agree “something” has to be done to alter the voting power of the conservative element? It could mean that neither agrees with each other, a state that both have experienced in the recent past. What degree of agreement exists between Strabo and Buteo, if any, on the need for “reform”?

If this year comes and goes without any movement on “reform” will some of its proponents give up hope and leave for greener pastures? This year could mark the final chance for the “reformers” to produce tangible results and both Consuls have an a considerable amount of their own auctoritas, not to mention dignitas, tied up with making good on a year of public statements about the need to alter the status quo in the Collegium.

If they fail to make any tangible attempt that could considerably damage any degree of influence they have built up. At the moment the odds are still in the favour of the conservative pontifices and it is far from certain the “reformers” can prevail.

Exposed at birth

2006-01-02T12:54:00.004-07:00

The shambles that passes for an election process in Nova Roma has concluded. There was a complete loss of focus in some quarters on the crux of the issue, namely what would happen when the clock in Rome struck midnight on the 31st December. Either the votes would have been counted, the ties broken and the results properly delivered, or the process would still be unfinished.

An interrex was not some subversive attempt by patricians to seize control of the government, nor was it unconstitutional since that office is established under the authority of the constitution. It was a practical and sensible attempt to provide for the possibility that the new consuls would not be in place..

The common sense efforts of Cn. Equitius Marinus and C. Popillius Laenas were then quickly seized upon and carried to the nearest hillside in an attempt to expose them shortly after birth. This was generated by the usual paranoia that grips a number of individuals in Nova Roma whenever a small crisis develops, a paranoia that stems in part from the fear that someone must be plotting, something, somewhere.

Of course the electoral process this year was a mess, but Marinus and Laenas acted with highly commendable promptness and decisiveness, and that was the root cause of the complaints that followed. They had had the temerity to take action.

Procedure is important and in the normal order of business the usual timeframes for calling the Senate would have been followed, as they have countless times before. This however was a crisis, not a very big one, but still a crisis. With the clock ticking it was important for our senior magistrates to develop a solution.

We should all be grateful that we don’t live in Rome of antiquity, beset as we are by this paralysing fear, for the Gauls would be busy dispatching us all to meet the ferryman, with some magistrates insisting, as the heads were rolling onto the floor, that due process would have to be followed before the Senate could meet to order the Consuls to close the gates and defend the city.

It is at times like this that the Senate performs its historic role, and we should be grateful we had two magistrates that had the gumption and backbone to try to deal with the problem, rather than ignore it.

Rotten entrails

2005-12-28T02:31:00.001-07:00

The elections in Nova Roma have concluded. This year they were a wretched affair in many respects, due in no small part to the abysmal failure to follow some very simple procedural rules. Of course if one cleaves to the idea that Nova Roma should be more about “people” than procedure, this will be irrelevant.

The problem with not following the laws of Nova Roma is that it provides scope for someone to claim that the elections were invalid, which in turn would lead to the claim that the successful candidates had not in fact been elected. This issue highlights the current dilemma we face, namely whether Nova Roman law can be interpreted, amended or supplanted by the mos maiorum.

Here then is the problem. Nova Roma is formed from two entities struggling to wear the same hat, Nova Roma the corporation and Nova Roma the republic. The law of the State of Maine governs Nova Roma the corporation, while its own laws govern Nova Roma the republic. The former barely permits the latter and certainly doesn’t allow for the mos maiorum, since the governing document of Nova Roma the corporation is the constitution.

The by-laws of the corporation are the various clauses of the constitution and nowhere in that document does it allow for the mos maiorum to be utilized to make sense of inept or contradictory clauses of that document, let alone the ordinary laws of Nova Roma.

Seen from the perspective of the republic the problem remains the same, since the constitution is a part of the collective law of Nova Roma, as defined in the chain of legal precedence, and its supremacy (except over the edicts of a dictator) is clearly established.

Therefore anything that interprets that document has to be held to be illegal under both our law and the law of the State of Maine, unless the document allows for an individual, group, instrument or concept to do so. Since the document does not allow anyone to tamper with the constitution in this manner, then it is inviolate.

In the elections the failure to follow the procedures proscribed by law cannot be brushed aside by the Tribunes, who have under the constitution only the power to administer the law as distinct from interpreting it. The presiding Consul failed to abide by the law and that fact is stark and simple and neither requires nor permits interpretation. Since neither the constitution nor the individual laws governing the conduct of elections allows us to fall back on the mos maiorum, we cannot just acknowledge that while the procedure laid down in our law was abrogated, the results remains valid.

Once again we are faced with the dilemma of either acting within the rigid scope of our constitution and holding fresh elections, or we can ignore the supremacy of the constitution and the chain of legal authority and follow the mos maiorum. Clearly the only sensible course of action is the latter, but by doing so not only have we nailed the lid of the constitution’s coffin down ever more tightly, we also potentially risk a legal challenge either inside or outside of Nova Roma.

The likelihood of a challenge through the US legal system is remote and the chances of one succeeding inside Nova Roma is highly unlikely since the concerted strength of vested interest would ensure that it was killed off. We cannot proceed however by ignoring these possibilities, for that would be tempting fate, imprudent and a poor example to set for citizens. When magistrates ignore the law we are a few steps closer to institutionalized dictatorship.

Clearly the irregularities in the various elections highlight the need to remove the supremacy of the constitution, absorb its relevant contents into one or more laws and return the law in general, and thus the people, to its historic and proper position of supremacy.

At the same time we need to accommodate the mos maiorum into the system. In republican Rome it was a constant, much like the sun rising and setting each day, omnipresent and deeply rooted in the psyche of the people. In Nova Roma, as usual, things are not that simple and there needs to be some thought given to how we imbed it into the order of legal precedence.

If we fail to address these issues, we will continue to have to wink at blatant breaches of our supreme legal document and our laws. The claim to be a society governed by the rule of law will prove to be one built on quicksand and charges of hypocrisy and nepotism will be self-evidently justified.

By remaining silent we will encourage more frequent and serious breaches of the law, until such time as we descend into the anarchy of just another on-line guild in a second rate RPG. It will be interesting to note any reactions from our (soon to be) two new consuls as their election was equally procedurally flawed.

This is hardly an auspicious start to the new year.

The nature of Nova Roma

2005-10-20T21:59:00.001-06:00

This question has frequently raised itself on the Main List. It may seem to some a rather trite debate, but to answer this question to our own satisfaction is to define why each of us is here.

We are Romans. We think we are Roman, and therefore we are. The standards of Romanitas may dictate how successful we are in the view of others in our individual claim to be Roman, but that claim cannot be expunged. It can be denied. It can be challenged. It can be held to be wanting, but it cannot be eradicated.

There are those who live in the Eternal City today who no doubt feel that merely asserting that one is Roman is insufficient, and that one must actually be born in Rome to be Roman. Some of us may not have the benefit of being born in the shadows of Rome itself, a Roman city or a Roman colonia and of strolling in our formative years amongst these ruins. Some of us though were lucky enough to be able to experience this, but this was a mere accident of birth. The commonality that we all have inside us though is the spirit of ancient Rome, which transcends time, distance and nationality.

Nova Roma is able to function in large part due to the Internet. This technological marvel allows us the ability to link across thousands of miles and unites the disparate peoples that comprise Nova Roma. While citizens occasionally meet at an individual, family, provincial or continental level, it is the glue of the Internet that binds us and supports us. It provides the skeletal structure for the body politic of Nova Roma.

We are not a nation, either in practice or in theory. We have no territory (I discount that patch of scrubland purchased as a symbol of a dream) and no other nation recognizes us as such but I would go further and say that we should never lay claim to nationhood for both practical and philosophical reasons.

Practically we live in an age where subversive elements seek to destroy the countries and cultures that nurtured us. Their causes are legion and their aims destructive and murderous. I cannot, and never would, disavow my nationality or the oaths of allegiance I have sworn in the course of my life. My experiences have shaped me, but so too have my family and social environs which in turn were shaped by the social conventions and history of the land I was born into.

To deny that would be a futile effort, because to attempt to deny or discard the nation and culture of one’s birth is to deny the essence of what one is. It would also be treasonable to the memory of the thousands that laid down their lives to shape, expand and defend my country. Someone recently said to me on the subject of death that he explained to his young son “death is not an end to everything but that people really die when they get forgotten”. Those who died in the service of their country only truly die when the memory of their sacrifices fade.

Ceremonies such as that at the Menin Gate or on Armistice Day at the Cenotaph keep alive the spirit of sacrifice. Trafalgar day, the anniversary of Waterloo, of Agincourt and Crecy, of Senlac Hill are less well known and more sparsely observed, but even now centuries later the anniversaries of these pivotal battles are still venerated. As time marches on other key events and examples of heroism and sacrifice take their place alongside these defining moments, for example 9/11, a day of infamy, is now etched into the psyche of Americans. How could one deny one’s nationality without denying the very existence and ultimate pain and death of 3000 or so victims of that atrocity? What sort of person could cast those events to one side and renounce their birth nation?

We are the products of our nations and will ever remain so. We must always owe allegiance to our own individual nations, being ready to answer any call of duty made upon us, while at the same time, and without any contradiction, owe allegiance to the inner spirit of Romanitas that we have made our creed. It is this spirit of the ancient Romans that has flowed throughout western civilisation and which has provided the foundation for the spirit that has raised our individual cultures to the heights and supported them in pit of despair. Whether our nations have, or yet may again in the future, war upon each other, the spirit of the Romans that has flowed through time bonds us together, both as nations, as individuals and as Nova Romans.

To be Nova Roman is to express one’s allegiance not to a nation but to the idea of Rome, and while nations may rise and fall this idea will endure. We may debate and struggle inside our virtual walls over issues of religion and politics. We may loathe or love the direction that Nova Roma has, is or may yet take. The message boards may at times resemble the verbal equivalent of the gladiatorial games. People will rage and rant, weep and wail, yet above all of this will remain one constant in each of us, a love of Ancient Rome.

We may even be divided on whether we should cleave only to the legacy of the republic, and condemn the rise and rule of the Emperors. We can ignite old debates over whether Gaius Iulius Caesar was a traitor to, or a saviour of, the nascent empire. We can be at each other’s throats from morn till night, yet above all else will rise one unifying clarion call to the memory of Rome; its heroes, its culture, its monuments, its very existence and legacy.

So what are we? We are individuals, we are (to name but a few) Britons, French, Germans, Americans, Canadians, Italians, Spaniards, Brazilians, and of course Italians. These are nations to which we owe our loyalty, love and allegiance but we are also united as citizens of the mind and spirit, owing allegiance to the memory of the immemorial river of Roman culture that survived the fall of the Empire and transcended into the most unconquerable of all states of existence, an idea.

Nova Roma is our expression of that idea, the imperfect, at times verbally brutal, often silly, frequently charming, infrequently calming, existence that we enter into, escaping for too brief a time from the trials and cares of the world. It is less than a nation but its foundation, Ancient Rome, will survive longer than any nation. Nova Roma itself may yet fail and pass into the shadows, but the idea of Rome will continue to march through time, uniting at least some of the citizens of the nations that were born from its ruins, and even some of those from areas that never lived under the Pax Romana.

So what is Nova Roma? Nova Roma is a nation of the mind and spirit.

Roman bronze pan saved for nation

2005-08-17T04:39:00.000-06:00

The rare bronze pan will be shared by three museums. A rare Roman bronze pan recording the building of Hadrian's Wall has been acquired by three British museums. The Staffordshire Moorlands Pan, dating from the second century AD, was found by a member of the public in June 2003.

more...

Link

Chariot races in Jerash, Jordan

2005-06-19T03:29:00.000-06:00

The sun bears down and dust swirls as Roman centurions, followed by armour-clad legionnaires and bruised gladiators, tramp out of the ancient hippodrome to the trailing sounds of a military march.

In the seats all around, 21st century spectators in modern-day Jordan cheer and applaud the spectacle before them -- a one-hour show held in honour of Julius Caesar, and part of Jordan's newest tourist attraction.

Starting mid-July, visitors to Jordan can plunge into the past, reliving in a unique location just north of the capital Amman some of the high moments that made the Roman empire.

The setting is Jerash, the ancient Roman city and one of Jordan's better preserved archaeological sites and one of the 10 great cities during the Roman golden age.

The place is the restored hippodrome located close to the South Gate just beyond the triumphal arch that was erected as a tribute to Emperor Hadrian who visited the city in 129 AD.

Much smaller than Rome's famed Circus Maximus, the Jerash hippodrome is nevertheless endowed with 10 starting gates, original stone seats for the spectators and surrounded in the distance by olive tree-dotted rolling hills.

The show is known as "The Roman Army and Chariot Experience" or simply by its acronym RACE.

more...

Link

Pompeii - ancient Roman cuisine

2005-05-29T14:09:00.000-06:00

News

Archaeologists in Pompeii give visitors a taste of ancient Roman cuisine

Sauces made from fermented fish entrails. A quiche-like pastry shell filled with bay leaves and ricotta cheese. For dessert, peaches with aromatic cumin and honey.

Those tastes may not be for everyone's palate, but the specialties of ancient Pompeii are being revived for a month at the site of the ruins by a research project intended to give new insights into how the Romans lived.

Pompeii's busiest restaurant was buried with the rest of the prosperous city when Mount Vesuvius erupted in A.D. 79. The eruption killed thousands of people, but a 20-foot-deep cocoon of volcanic ash kept the city almost intact, providing precious information on domestic life in the ancient world.

Starting Thursday, visitors will do more than stroll around the restaurant's tables and gaze at the kitchen tools that have stayed where residents left them when they were surprised by the eruption.

Researchers have tried to revive the city's food by replanting the fruits and vegetables that were part of the Roman diet: figs and olives, plums and grapes, as well as poppy, broom (a flowery bush), bramble (a prickly shrub), and mallow (an herb).

more...

Link

Off with their heads!

2005-05-26T02:35:00.002-06:00

The long period of drought on the Main List momentarily broke today. A faint splash of acrimony fell on our heads, or to be more accurate on the head of the hapless Publius Minius Mercator.

This new and eager citizen had the temerity to not only have an idea but also tried to demonstrate the advantages of it by a test implementation of his proposed forum. Did this display of enthusiasm prompt a round of “hurrahs”? Was the list witness to posts congratulating, if not the actual idea, at least his proactive attempt at improving Nova Roma? Some posts did appear in that vein. One was not so generous.

On the Main List I encouraged people not to douse new citizens with cold water, but in reality the liquid used was in fact quite acidic. Having myself been quite responsible for dousing more established citizens with verbal solutions ranging from mild vinegar to sulphuric acid, it may seem somewhat incongruous that I appealed for mercy on behalf of Mercator.

The explanation is that while I am more than comfortable entering the arena of written (and if I had the opportunity – verbal) combat with seasoned veterans of the Nova Roman political scene as my opponents, I see absolutely no point in selecting a new citizen for such treatment. It is utterly counter-productive to continued recruitment efforts.

This was a minor incident but it is actually quite illustrative of one of the principal problems we face in recruitment. As I have said in previous articles, new citizens arrive and find that there is little direction awaiting them. Oh yes, there is the page on the Nova Roman web site that attempts to provide a guide as to “what next?” but there is little assistance on a one-to-one basis, or even an actual live “greeter”.

While on the one hand I shudder at the thought that we may have to sink to the level of Wal-Mart and have someone pressing the flesh of new citizens and leading them on some virtual induction tour, some guidance and contact is necessary. Currently we offer perfunctory congratulations on their probationary citizenship and then open the door of the Censor’s office and usher them into the forum and then close that door firmly behind them. If like Mercator you have the temerity to have an idea and act on it you may hear the clink of the nails as someone starts preparing the cross they intend to crucify you on.

We could of course expect new citizens to remain silent and unseen as they dutifully plough through the annals of Nova Roma, on the now defunct web forum, the old Yahoo Main List and the current Main List. Possibly by the time their tax payment came due the following year they may have at least assimilated 75% of the information. In reality though expecting people to play the role of the dormouse in our version of the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party is unrealistic. New citizens are fired up and want to become involved. This does inevitably result in some of our citizens feeling as though Ground Hog day has struck again. So we are faced with two choices; patiently explain the background and previous discussion threads, or, start drenching them in acid rain. I think anyone who is relatively sane and rational will agree that the former is the only choice.

This anal retentive obsession with petty fogging details is a hallmark of where Nova Roma currently rests its sagging bottom. Process and protocol are important but if we as a “state” make so little effort to officially provide new citizens with the tools necessary to master those aspects of life in Nova Roma, then how on earth can we be surprised when some eager and keen new citizen drops a “clanger”?

As “clangers” go this one could not be classified as horrendous, dangerous, let alone as was suggested subversive. Even the reaction didn’t even register on the scale of Nova Roma eruptions – for us as onlookers or third party participants. For Mercator though, he may have been left feeling as though he was caught in the leading edge of a storm, and possibly that he should like the dormouse have climbed into the teapot and hid from view for at least six months. I would be most surprised if he didn’t feel he had fallen down Alice’s hole. We came close, very close, to having the Queen of Hearts appear shrieking “Off with their heads!”

So what is the solution? Possibly the only practical thing we can do is recommend that new citizens equip themselves with a copy of “Alice in Wonderland” and use it as a survival guide to the insanity that is life in Nova Roma.

Alice: “If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?”

Ah Alice – your dream has become reality – well virtual reality. From the wreckage and flotsam of what was once Nova Roma now arises Nova Womaland, where everything is back to front.

Alice: “It would be so nice if something made sense for a change.”

After a few months in Nova Womaland Alice would quickly realise that having things make sense would be an even more unlikely event than her being able to grow and shrink in size

So let me provide, through of course a slight alteration in dialogue, an insight into how a simple act of enthusiasm becomes an act of sedition in our topsy-turvy world:

Queen of Hearts: Who's been using my Nova Roman flag? WHO'S BEEN USING MY NOVA ROMAN FLAG? / Who dares to hate through vulgar imitate / The royal communication gag? / For using my Nova Roman flag / Someone's head will fall in the bag.

Beware the Dogs of Life

2005-05-24T22:30:00.000-06:00

Press Release Source: AuthorHouse

Author Takes Readers on Enthralling Epic through the Ancient World

In a new novel set against the backdrop of the Roman Empire, Cave Canem (Beware of Dog) (now available through AuthorHouse), author Richard B. Schmidt presents an epic of the interweaving destiny of three lives.

Set in the first century, the book follows the exploits of three characters whose very different lives intertwine in an ironic tapestry of fate woven around several compelling mysteries that do not unravel until the climatic end.

more...

Link

Rebirth of the Roman villa

2005-05-22T22:04:00.000-06:00

VICENZA, Italy There are over 3,500 historic villas in the Veneto and Friuli regions of northeastern Italy, many of them built in the Palladian style. The number of houses and public buildings in the rest of the world inspired by the 16th-century architect would be impossible to calculate.

more...

Link

Roman treasure in Suffolk, UK

2005-05-09T21:58:00.000-06:00

For nearly 2,000 years a treasure trove of Roman coins lay hidden just below the surface of an Ipswich field.

But today around 1,000 coins are being examined at the British Museum after being unearthed by two metal detecting enthusiasts.

After Suffolk had thundered to the sound of the Roman legions, the coins lay undisturbed through two world wars, invasions of the Saxons and Vikings and the reigns of numerous kings and queens.....

And all it took to unearth them was two men from Chantry with a metal detector.

more...

Link

Bring back the games!

2005-04-24T20:55:00.001-06:00

Part of Nova Roma’s problem of retaining people stems from the age we live in. This is the age of instant gratification. At the press of a button we can get power, water, electricity, music, television, radio, automotive power, to name but a few conveniences. Computer software has become ever more glitzy and snappy, offering increasing degrees of realistic animation – the precursor no doubt to the holodeck of Star Trek fame. In the Western world we are spoon-fed from birth to death. Then we stumble upon Nova Roma.

Nova Roma relies on people to use the more cerebral elements of their imagination, unaided by any props, except a few web pages of varying degrees of amateurism and a mass of text. I know many new citizens that have landed in Nova Roma, having fought their way through the bramble bushes of the naming conventions and absent paters, only to ask, “what happens now?” That is a very good question, what does happen now?

If they are lucky there will be a full-blown political free-for-all in progress on the Main List, with copious amounts of verbal blood letting. Savage comments will be traded back and forth and from the stands of our virtual amphitheatre there may come the appreciative “ooohs” and “aaahhs” of the watching crowd (probably all 50 of them). There will be the usual wailing about how terrible it is that the list has sunk to its usual level, charges, counter-charges, threats of prosecutions, resignations, peace lists being formed (and disbanded and re-formed), whole groups of people labelled as revolutionaries and plotters, others as modernistic subversives, or Christian evangelists. The whole scene is thoroughly gripping to a new citizen. Just another day in the forum of Ancient Rome! This is spectacular entertainment that you cannot put a price on.

If they are unlucky the list will be as it is now, thoroughly and odiously pleasant. People will be polite to each other and post voluminously on un-edifying topics. It will be just another day on any old Yahoo list. It will require people to think, to read and to construct semi-intellectual posts. In short there will be a total absence of instant gratification.

Are we so different from the Ancient Romans? The nobility of Rome identified the appeal of gladiatorial combats and their usefulness in keeping the citizenry distracted. Between the grain dole, free feasts, and the amphitheatres, they provided the plebs with enough of a narcotic to keep them sedated, most of the time, and if they did break loose in bloody riots in the forum it was usually at the behest of a noble patron or demagogue. Even in disorder there was order and control. Are the citizens of Nova Roma that much different?

The intellectuals amongst us would be horrified at the thought that they need to be stimulated by the base appeal of verbal combat on the Main List, but look what happened when the conflict between the Boni and Moderati / Libra alliance was at its height. People had a purpose, a goal. Break the Boni! Defend the Collegium! Expel Drusus! Save Drusus! Expel Maior! Save Maior! Prosecute Scaurus! Defend Scaurus! On and on went the rallying calls. Everyone participated in the debates, either publicly or behind the scenes in their factions. Advice was tendered by the bucket full and strategies were laid down and tactics devised and revised. Nova Roma bubbled with life and passion. The stands of the amphitheatre were always full.

Now the stands are empty. The plebs can find no great debates, no blood on the sand, not even a pinprick of claret. Now they have to think if they want to participate on the Main List. Threads on reproduction Roman furniture, where and how best to learn Latin, our virtual chariot races, all worthy and noble but not very “gripping”. A mild titter raised over the association of the Gens Minia’s new group, Neo Roma, with sanitary equipment or mild amusement at a post headed “Wet girls”, the product of a re-mailer virus, is the best that can be managed.

If instead of trying to purge the Main List of any passion whatsoever and instilling a mish-mash of Victorian values, some of Nova Roma’s notables could encourage free and bloody speech, if they could seize a few citizens and toss them into the arena and tell them to stab each other with the product of their keyboards, then we may see some vibrant life begin to bubble again in Nova Roma. Then we may retain more citizens, since then they would see a purpose and reason to log on.

It is time to acknowledge that our citizens are no different from our spiritual ancestors who “ooohed” and “aaahed” all day under a beating hot sun as men duelled to the death or were shredded by wild beasts. We think we have progressed so far, have become so civilised, but that is because the arena is brought into our houses by the touch of a button. Television is the arena of this age, providing technicolor images of death and gore, both real and fictional, at the touch of a button. In fact we have become so advanced that we can freeze the moment of death on a CD or even on live TV, make popcorn and return to gorge both our stomachs and our appetites for blood. How the Ancient Romans would have appreciated that function!

So in Nova Roma let us not hide behind this myth that people want an anodyne list, that they want this veneer of civility. Everyone revelled in the gore when it flowed freely and often. Certainly it is necessary to explain to the more “sensitive” new citizen the ways of the Main List, lest they be terrified, shocked, appalled (insert the adjective most used by Nova Roma’s nannies) and run shrieking for the gates and the far beyond, but let us not be so duplicitous and mealy-mouthed that we cannot salute those that are prepared to be beaten by a keyboard for the edification of the masses.

Once more let the cry rip through Nova Roma; “Those who are about to libel and be libelled salute you!”

The barge of the dead

2005-04-16T23:02:00.001-06:00

The Gens Minia has apparently emigrated from Nova Roma to found a new organisation. This group, I forget its name and have no intention of looking it up, intends to best Nova Roma at its own game, by being home to just about anyone. No viewpoint, ideology, belief, goal or time period is outside the scope of this barge of the dead.

No doubt it will stagger across the e-waves, initially born slightly faster than it deserves, navigating the choppy waters of imperial rule, constitutions, laws and issues over religions. Eventually though it will strike the rock of reality and spill its cargo of cadavers into the waters of the Internet, forever to be sundered and lost in recriminations, dashed dreams and petty squabbles. Could I be wrong? Of course, but given the fate of most Internet based groups I doubt it.

The actual event itself is utterly irrelevant to Nova Roma. There has already been a range of views expressed, from outright sarcasm and references to an association with sanitary equipment, to a request from Caeso Fabius Buteo Quintilianus for a more sombre approach to the matter.

I say let them sail on, no doubt tipping overboard the corpses of those who either actually find something concrete to believe in, or those who fall prey to the caprices of their “Imperator”. They should all greet him on some message board with the phrase “Those who are already dead and just unburied salute you!” Imperator of what? What absolute fatuous, and predictable, childish nonsense.

This event only serves to demonstrate that Nova Roma cannot become all things to all people without becoming equally ridiculous. There is a real issue underpinning this though, and that is purpose. What is the purpose of Nova Roma? The long term goals have been fairly well enunciated, debated, fought over, buried, exhumed, re-buried and generally praised or vilified, without much critical thinking in-between.

Citizens need to be given immediate goals to work towards. The Senate needs to give leadership, vision and direction in this respect. The Senate is the key to the success, or failure, of Nova Roma. The model of republican government is exactly what a volunteer Internet community needs, for nothing else makes sense or has a basis in adult and rational thought.

The citizens of Nova Roma may elect buffoons, or they may elect non-entities, but the Senate is the counter-point to the insanities that maybe perpetrated on us by our magistrates. That is the well-established theory, and one that I subscribe to wholeheartedly. Transforming the theoretical into reality may prove somewhat harder.

If the Senate is content to sit and debate the minor issues of Nova Roman life, rather than deal with the lack of immediate purpose for citizens, then the people in time honoured fashion will turn their idle hands to each others throats.

A certain amount of political carnage is healthy and very Roman, but were this Rome of antiquity at some point, normally when the forum became so drenched in blood, the Senate would have to stir itself to act. Most worrying of all is that the people are now so lethargic that they cannot even summon up enough energy to cut each other to shreds on the lists.

A complete lack of purpose, other than reading the ramblings on various lists and ogling at the latest crisis or drama (and as they go this latest one has been pretty third rate entertainment), grips our citizens. They have no “work” to do. I wonder how many citizens at times struggle to find a reason to log onto the Main List? Just what is the reason for paying that tax?

I know that some people think that many of our citizens only expect to receive a benefit, rather than contribute one iota of creativity. Such is the curse of modernity that undoubtedly many do expect to receive rather than give. The concept of service is sadly lacking in many quarters of Nova Roma.

This is not however an entirely fair portrayal of our citizens. Many expect to join and be given a task, a role; a function. Titles do indeed abound in Nova Roma, but once one is either gifted one, or wins one through election, the reality sets in that few above them in the Nova Roman pecking order have a clue what their “staff” should be doing.

If the Senate cannot formulate short and medium term goals for Nova Roma then we will continue to stagnate. I say the Senate since the stability of that body, not being subject to re-election, could ensure continuity of sound policies even in the face of incompetent or invisible magistrates.

Determining what “work” could be assigned, that benefits Nova Roma, advances its long term goals and increases the citizen base, is another matter. The first step is a general recognition that if we don’t want more disenchanted citizens to seek some sort of activity or purpose elsewhere, then the Senate needs to bestir itself and propose, debate and pass resolutions on firm policies for the here and now.

The Senate needs to take this lead if the trickle of emigrants leaving our gates is not to grow into a stream, then a river and finally a tsunami as people rush to the next barge of the dead to be built, to escape the eruption of terminal boredom that threatens to smother us all in the ash of inactivity and meaningless existence.

If the Senate chooses to do nothing in this respect, then it should at least place an order for more Nova Roman coins to be minted so that it can have them ready to pay the ferryman as more of our citizens depart into the shadows.

Martyrs of the Molehill

2005-04-03T22:13:00.001-06:00

If recently I have haven’t written much it is not through lack of interest, but rather a lack of anything that was fundamentally noteworthy and new as an issue. One issue is however now noteworthy, but sadly not really new, namely the increasing use of the veto by some of our Tribunes.

Given the current lack of any real distinction between patricians and plebeians and certainly no “class war” or suppression of the rights of plebeians by predatory patricians, there really isn’t much for our Tribunes to do in Nova Roma, which is no doubt the reason why, in an effort to give meaning to their existence, it was decided to graft onto their historic role that of curators of the constitution.

This function, combined with the personalities of some of our current Tribunes, is the root cause for the increase in the use of the veto. Instead of protecting an individual from magisterial abuse, our Tribunes concentrate on the finite details of the constitution; it says black but does that mean black or does it really mean dark purple? If it says black does it actually mean it can never be white? This recently culminated in one Tribune trying to infer that public games which required the use of the English language were in fact discriminatory towards non-English speaking citizens and particularly those who were weak in written English skills.

Had the Tribune that interposed this veto done this in Rome of antiquity he probably wouldn’t have made it back to his house alive. The plebeians, the very people he was meant to protect, would in all likelihood have lynched him. It would have been a fundamentally brave or fundamentally stupid Tribune that deprived the Romans of their entertainment. The very fact that our Nova Roman Tribune could even contemplate doing this is indicative of the disassociation that exists between the plebeians in Nova Roma and the Tribunes. The Tribunes feel no instinctive reluctance to do something that would harm the very social order they are meant to protect, and the plebeians didn’t rise as one to protest this, as they really don’t have any inherent identity as plebeians.

In Rome patricians were a distinct group, as were plebeians and despite the rise of some plebeians into the Senate and somewhat of a blurring of the distinction over the course of generations for such a select few plebeian families, in general the divide was obvious. In Nova Roma there was once nothing that marked a patrician or a plebeian other than a nomen that was either one or the other. Now with the passage of the Lex Equitia de Familia, a very necessary reform, there isn’t even that obvious distinction.

So our Tribunes have no historic role to play in Nova Roma, and the unhistoric one they have been assigned could have been beneficial had some of them shown more restraint recently. Had these Tribunes adopted the restraint shown by a constitutional monarchy, where the sovereign has the power to dismiss parliament in extreme circumstances, such as a tyrannical abuse of power, and only exercises that rarely and judiciously, then they would have brought more honour to their role than is currently the case.

The possession of the veto is a great responsibility and it calls for its careful and selective use. Instead it has been employed on the last occasion to enforce a very silly position, namely that it is discriminatory to use English in public games as the constitution only mandates its use for government matters or day-to-day business. The games, apparently, don’t fall into either category.

That quintessential pragmatic Roman approach to such questions was absent, again indicative of how few steps we have collectively taken towards a mastery of Romanitas. A Roman of antiquity would not even have been led down this path of tortuous reasoning, but even assuming they had the solution would have lain in what was the fundamental purpose of a Tribune and was this a hill to die on?

Sadly for Nova Roma some of our current Tribunes are all too content to seize on a molehill and terraform it into Mt. Everest and then proceed to huff and puff all the way to the top of it, dragging the rest of us reluctantly along, and there on its highest peak fall on their swords in “defence of the constitution”. If there was ever a single example that best demonstrates why the constitution has become a millstone around our necks and as far removed from being a document that preserves our rights, as the Earth is from Alpha Centauri, then this is it. A document that is meant to protect us in fact oppresses us, encouraging through its convoluted and imprecise language ludicrous upsets such as the “English, no English” debate.

From this latest unhappy example of why some people equate being Roman with a profligate use of tools that the Romans designed, in this case the veto, what conclusions can one draw? Firstly that we need to create a real separation of the social orders in a historic manner as possible, and focus the Tribunes on their traditional role. Secondly, and in conjunction with the first lesson, that we need to scrap the constitution and restore the traditional supremacy of the law, as determined by the people, and remove the excuse for all this grandstanding that is currently the hallmark of a number of the Tribunes this year; not all, but a significant enough number for their actions to go from being farcical to pointlessly obstructive.

It is time for a number of our Tribunes to start being Tribunes of Nova Roma, rather than Martyrs of the Molehill.

Go Roman!

2005-03-07T22:15:00.001-07:00

The Nova Roman census is approaching and it seems certain that the end result will be a drastic pruning of the citizen rolls. One hopes, against all the evidence, that otherwise dormant citizens will identify themselves and stave off the inevitable.

Some may not want to pay the tax, others may not want to vote, and others will not want to do either but out of all three groups of the “disappeared” there will be those that still want to be classed as citizens. These will not be enough though to redress the flow out of Nova Roma.

Here we reach the dichotomy, for some citizens at least. A strong and active Nova Roma is the common goal of those still with enough faith in the possibilities for the future, but that may come at too greater price for them. Increased citizens do not necessarily mean increasing the numbers of those that adhere to the Religio as their own personal religion.

Nova Roma could become more secular, and in fact since there is no wellspring of adherents outside Nova Roma, just isolated pockets and individuals, that is quite likely if citizen numbers increase. What is important though is that the Religio is protected and supported by all new citizens, since this will allow it to gradually grow. The more people who join and dedicate themselves to this then the stronger the Religio will become.

The Go Roman! project is a viable and proactive method of increasing the citizen base, from within universities in all provinces of Nova Roma. If we are to counter the drain of citizens we need to seriously and consistently attempt to attract new citizens. There are sufficient traditions and historic evidence that Rome, right from its inception, did not sit passively by and just wait for people to drift in, and neither should Nova Roma.

Increasing the citizen base will increase taxes, the proportion probably similar to that payed now, and offer Nova Roma fresh opportunities to expand. The next few months will be critical and supporting Go Roman! is equivalent to supporting the existence and growth of Nova Roma.

When Go Roman! is put before the Senate and people of Nova Roma it should be wholeheartedly supported.

Narrow minded family dogma

2005-02-28T23:11:00.001-07:00

The inevitable backlash to the Lex Equitia de Familia has commenced, with Domitius Constantinus Fuscus announcing his attention to bring before the people a law amending the way in which familiae can be created within a gens. He has given us all a hint in Main List post 33859 as to what that law will not focus on, namely that he will not give the “original name holder”, which one assumes is the founder and paterfamilias, any power over people “wearing” his name. Other than that snippet details are currently vague to non-existent.

This obviously is an attempt to fundamentally alter the current historically correct manner in which new citizens select a name. Fuscus is upset that any Tom, Dick or Harry can simply choose Constantinus as a nomen. This is his macro surname, so he feels somewhat protective of it. That is all utterly irrelevant though, as new citizens in Rome could take any nomen they pleased and Nova Roma should be no different.

Fuscus ran a closed shop in his gens; closed to non-Italians. His vision was of a group all centred in Italy, all communicating in the same language and all close enough to meet.

His assertion that he as paterfamilias will not have any control over those who bear his name maybe strictly correct, but one assumes that he will exert that control indirectly through provisions in his proposed law, otherwise why bother with the law? He intends to strangle the freedom of new citizens to take a nomen of their choice. How will he try to achieve this; what alterations will he produce?

The most likely alteration is to prohibit anyone from forming a familia in a gens unless they have first been routed through an existing familia and been emancipated.

This means that Fuscus could once more close the tap tightly shut on his small gens by refusing to admit a new citizen to his familia. As a paterfamilias he can refuse to emancipate a familia member, and even though they have recourse to the Praetors, this is not a legally guaranteed relief. The matter would have to be heard and the Praetor would have to rule in favour of emancipation.

If there are others in his gens who are currently sui iuris, i.e. paters themselves, this stranglehold could still be applied if all the others refused to admit new citizens.

How charming that a new citizen’s first introduction to Nova Roma is a prohibition on taking a name due to some elitist, narrow minded and nationalistic dogma. What an absolutely stunning encounter of the third kind with such an alien and un-Roman concept.

If he does produce such a law it is to be hoped that it is voted down, resoundingly. The Lex Equitia de Familia offers new citizens the opportunity to associate themselves with a gens of their choice, and a free and unfettered choice of nomen was a historic fact and should remain so in Nova Roma.

It is very sad that Fuscus intends to use the law to defend a narrow position of self-interest. Perhaps if he spent more time on encouraging people to join his gens, whether as sui iuris or not, rather than on digging a hole, climbing into it and throwing rocks at anyone who tries to inveigle their way into his gens, then a suggestion such as he now makes might carry more moral force.

As it is, Fuscus certainly appears devoid of any credibility in this matter since he is so clearly biased.

City of fables unearths real heroes

2005-02-10T23:59:00.000-07:00

By Jeremy Laurence
COLCHESTER (Reuters) - It is the home of Humpty Dumpty, Old King Cole and Camelot -- or so legend has it.

But archaeologists raking over the past can now go one better for the city of Colchester.

After painstaking excavation work they have proof of real heroes from the ancient world. Last month they revealed the remains of a Roman Circus, or chariot racing track.

In the past 30 years archaeologists in the city have unearthed evidence dating back to Roman rule over 2,000 years ago, rewriting British history along the way. The circus underlines the city's importance as a provincial Roman outpost.

In its heyday the track would have made an awesome sight with a straight measuring about 350 metres and stands for some 8,000 people, more than the population of the town itself.

Formerly Colonia Victricensis, meaning "City of the Victorious", Colchester is Britain's oldest recorded town and its first capital.

more...

Link

Bloody soap in the forum

2005-02-10T22:53:00.001-07:00

The remaining political alliances in Nova Roma appear to be in a state of flux. The debate over the status of Caius Curius Saturninus has resulted in deep divisions in the alliance of the Libra and the Moderati. Gaius Equitius Cato has spoken for the rule of law, while Pompeia Minucia-Tiberia Strabo has spoken for the rule of equity.

The debate has recently dulled to an imperceptible murmur below the surface of waters that only a few weeks ago were storm tossed and flecked with froth and the detritus of the deep. An awful lot of unnecessary garbage was hauled from the political ocean floor and thrown around, yet the issue still remains unanswered; is Saturninus a Tribune or not?

It would be thoroughly redundant to explore the whole issue again, suffice it to say in my mind he is not. Aulus Apollonius Cordus rightly suggested that surely it would be in the best interests of Saturninius to put the matter before the Plebs and yet in the face of this undeniable logic an intercessio was proclaimed.

The real issue of interest here is not the fate of Saturninus but how easily the bonds of political unity were shattered. The single unifying factor that held a very disparate group of people together was opposition to the Boni, and if ever that is doubted then look to the level of sarcasm, invective and at times barely suppressed fury that was hurled at the heads of those who stood firm in the belief that Saturninus had forfeited his office when he had his brief emotional spat and ran around the forum with his political loincloth on his head, prior to heading for the gates and exile, only (of course) to return a short while later.

As if this drama wasn’t sufficient Gaius Modius Athanasius also ripped his undergarments off and draped them on his noggin and then in a characteristic display of petulance deleted the PeaceNR list and ran not for the gates of Nova Roma, but into the shadows, unsubscribing from Main List. Then (of course) a short while later a message arrived through an intermediary that Athanasius had created another peace list which a number of us have joined, if only to be witness to the predictable displays of outrage, recanting, misery, happiness, political insincerity, deceptions, falsehoods, and general political skulduggery.

As usual after one of these orgiastic displays of communal and individual excitement, everything has gone rather limp, as the period of political rutting draws to a close. The acrimonious posts have ceased as everyone contemplates the wreckage of another fine day in the forum.

In case any of you think that this slightly sarcastic account signifies disapproval, think again. It is very Roman behaviour, and in fact these displays of temper, abuse and general written rowdiness maybe the one successful example of reconstruction that Nova Roma can lay claim to.

Yet even in the face of such outstanding "Roma resurgens", Nova Roma’s own self-appointed nanny brigade of Mary Poppins clones hovered in the wings, waiting to slap censorial notas over the mouths of some of our more outspoken protagonists. In the midst of the usual debacle in the forum the faint and irritating squeak of Victorian prurience could be heard; yes the holders of the censorial soap had arrived to wash out the mouths of all those who in their zeal to insult each other had, apparently, risked the collapse of the republic through the subsequent damage to their reputations and that of Nova Roma.

Nova Roma really is a dichotomy; on the one hand a truly Roman debate rages, while around the edges of the seething and bubbling crowd, this little annoying lap-dog dances and yaps, nipping at the heels of the combatants and piddling, in its excitement, thin and feeble streams of justification for its un-Roman stand against "rude" language.

A new act in this fascinating political play that is Nova Roma is commencing. The stagehands have long since cleared away the Boni backdrop, and now it looks as though that of the Libra Alliance is set to join the other redundant and discarded props under the stage.

Who knows what the next act will bring or even who will play the lead, but what one can say with certainty is that this certainly is a substitute for the bloodshed in the arena.

Bears, honey and mice - an alternative fairy tale

2005-01-29T23:06:00.001-07:00

There once were twenty-six bears that lived in a rather nice house called The Curia down in the depths of the woods.

One Saturday morning some of the bears decided that as everything was tidy in the house they could set off for a quiet stroll through the woods while their breakfast cooled. They left two bears fast asleep in their beds, or so they thought.

On their return the bears were shocked to find that the door to The Curia had been kicked down. In fact there was so little left of the door that the bears wondered if the NRA had raided them looking for trophies. They just stood looking at the remains of their nicely polished and maintained entrance; slivers of wood and broken shards of glass lay everywhere. Fearfully the bears peered in expecting to find the bullet-ridden corpses of their two co-occupiers, but there was no sign of them.

Stepping into The Curia the bears looked in each room. In the dining room they found five extra places had been set. They tip-toed upstairs to the bedrooms of the other bears, where the shock of their lives awaited them. In a bedroom that was meant to be vacant they found a large pot marked “Censorial F avoured Honey”.

This was in fact “Censorial Flavoured Honey” which all the bears had only handed out in the past after a communal meeting of the House Council. Obviously someone had scratched out the missing “l” on the label. As they looked into the pot the bears saw a mouse squirming and wriggling in sticky gloop that was their pride and joy. They went and checked four other vacant bedrooms and to their increasing dismay they found in each, a similarly defaced pot complete with mouse.

The bears were now quite irritated but at the same time puzzled as to how the mice had destroyed the front door, they were just mice after all, so ignoring them they went to look for the missing two bears. When they opened the door of one of the bears, who was in fact a polar bear, they found them both sitting on the floor with a deck of cards dealt between them. Each card had a name of a mouse on. When asked what they were doing and what the mice were doing in the honey pots, one of them, a real GEM of a bear, replied that they were nice mice and they deserved a swim in the honey.

One of the bears said “So let me get this straight, behind our backs, without even a hint of what you were going to do, you smashed our door down and let these mice into our house? These wouldn’t be the same mice that help fund your rent here would they?"

The GEM bear roared out “You're obviously angry, and as obviously have no damn idea what you're talking about. Whose favors do you think were returned?”

Another bear said “What are you doing with all those cards?”

GEM said without a hint of embarrassment or guilt “Right now I'm in the position of horse trading.”

Polar Bear said nothing, but then he rarely did.

The other bears just sat down wearily on the floor and watched as GEM and Polar kept gambling away. Apparently they were going to parcel out the remaining rooms in The Curia, until it would be so full that the walls would bulge. It seemed certain that GEM wanted to move all these new tenants in so that he could command a majority on the House Council and be allowed to stay top bear for the remainder of his life.

So children, do you think that the Bears sorted out their differences and lived happily ever after? Well the end of this story has yet to be written, but it seems certain that GEM bear will continue handing out pots of honey to his friends.

What a marvellous Patron GEM is. I wish I were a mouse, don’t you children?

The potestas pot

2005-01-23T23:49:00.000-07:00

As the 29th January draws close, individuals known to be either members of the Libra Alliance or the Moderati are trying to convince citizens to emancipate themselves.

One of them is in the Censor's office and would be privy to the number of requests for emancipation. One can surmise that had the majority of active citizens applied already there wouldn't have been so much consternation. The 29th is the date when the sun sets over the concept of the large all embracing gens and rises over that of the familia. The concern of these people, of course, lies with patria potestas.

The Lex Equitia de Familia enshrined formally the extent and operation of patria potestas. This was a substantial step in the direction of reconstruction. Not everyone was happy, with some existing paters decrying the attempt to create more historic structures as too much, too soon.

Since very little of major note ever happens as far as reconstruction is concerned, this is somewhat alarmist. A number of the old gens had paters who were silent, head count and even socii; they had essentially abandoned their gens. The emphasis on the familia will create a structure where there is order, structure and a sound historic basis.

What could those in the Libra Alliance and the Moderati have against the concept of patria potestas? It appears that they fear that people will be "controlled" by their pater. Of course this actually translates into their being very concerned that the familia will form voting blocks, and one also assumes that the fear is that they will vote against Moderati and Libra Alliance candidates.

We have had to endure a number of alarmist posts in this vein. Gnaeus Iulius Caesar Cornelianus attempted to rectify that imbalance by a number of posts urging that citizens be left to their own devices. All he got for his trouble was a series of confrontational posts from some of the emancipators.

The familia was the core unit around which early, regal and Republican Rome grew. Anything that promotes the familia in Nova Roma is a good thing. Patria potestas is a historic fact, and its benefits within a familia structure are obvious.

In reality the likely result after the 29th January is a mix of familia and emancipated individuals. Gradually those that are emancipated will gather familia members around them. There will be no great crisis and Nova Roma will endure and if everyone concerned applies enough wisdom, it will benefit greatly from the focus shifting to the familia.

Will those in familia vote for Moderati and Libra candidates? Who knows. A paterfamilias cannot exert his potestas in respect of voting or the membership of the Ordo Equester, so their electoral success or failure will depend, as always, on whether those factions appeal to individual voters. It is exceptionally sad that as this milestone approaches these few individuals who engaged in these alarmist posts had only the self-interest of these two political factions at heart.

To be fair there was one member of the Moderati who did his best to strike a balance in the advice he gave, and he did succeed in doing so. Others in their posts risked whipping up a maelstrom of concern and anxiety and the strong suspicion is that the motivator for doing so was concern over the electoral fortunes of their factions.

In the face of the most recent real injection of significant historical reconstruction the modernists urged a move away from the familia, the backbone of ancient Rome. The conclusion must be drawn that despite all the florid statements to the contrary, reconstruction is just too unappetising for them.

One assumes they won't be dipping into the pot of potestas, because that would be too contradictory and hypocritical - or will they?

Perhaps those paters and maters that enter into a covenant to advocate support for the Moderati and Libra factions will receive a certificate allowing the bearer to dip at will into the potestas pot?

I think I will pass on that particular dish. It would probably be poisoned anyway.

Wolves back at Rome's door

2005-01-19T01:53:00.000-07:00

ROME (AFP) - Wolves are back at Rome's gates more than 2,000 years after the animal became a symbol of the capital, the discovery of a dead wolf in a nearby national park reviving environmentalists' hopes and farmers' fears.

Ecologists are excited by the discovery of the young wolf's carcass along a roadside, seeing it as the fruit of a 30-year protection programme after Italy's lupine population flirted with extinction in the 1970s.

more...

Link

Nero's buried treasure

2005-01-19T01:50:00.000-07:00

ROME, Jan. 18 -- When the infamous emperor Nero fell from power in A.D. 68, weakened by military revolts, his successors decided no personal trace of his reign should remain. They covered with debris the giant and sumptuous Domus Aurea -- the Golden House -- that he built on a hill in central Rome. They replaced an adjacent artificial lake with the Colosseum.

The entombment of the palace was meant to make everyone forget Nero. Instead, it conserved, as if in amber, his residential compound as few ancient sites in Rome have been preserved. This week, almost 2,000 years after Nero's rule, Rome city officials unveiled a new find from the palace that offers a tantalizing hint of the treasures buried beneath the hill."

more...

Link

Long-lost star catalog discovered

2005-01-17T23:56:00.000-07:00

An ancient mystery may have been solved by Louisiana State University Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy Bradley E. Schaefer.

Schaefer has discovered that the long-lost star catalog of Hipparchus, which dates back to 129 B.C., appears on a Roman statue called the Farnese Atlas. Hipparchus was one of the greatest astronomers of antiquity and his star catalog was the first in the world, as well as the most influential. The catalog was lost early in the Christian era, perhaps in the fire at the great library in Alexandria.

more...

Link

Van Helsing and Count Bonus

2005-01-10T21:59:00.000-07:00

The coming year offers all of Nova Roma an opportunity to choose between two roads, one of reconstruction and the other of stagnation. Of course one could be forgiven for saying, “well you would say that Caesar, being a reconstructionist” but that assessment is not based on a narrow view of reconstruction versus modernism, but instead on an assessment of what were mooted as ideas by the modernists over the course of the previous year.

The central tenet of the Moderati and to some extent (muted and veiled though it is) of the Libra Alliance as well, is opposition to the Boni. The prospect of another year of listening to interminable speeches about the wicked Boni is mildly amusing, given the fact that the Boni are defunct. The only thing that could conceivably breathe life into that corpse is, ironically, the persistent and unyielding shrieking about Boni plots and the need for vigilance. The ferocity of the opposition is sadly not a testament to the effectiveness of the Boni, but rather to the inability of certain individuals to seize on a position other than that the monster is not dead, just sleeping.

With the fervour of Van Helsing, our collection of vampire hunters run around Nova Roma in a frenzy of Transylvanian terror, yelling to a largely uninterested populace, that Count Bonus is not dead, but has turned into a bat and flitted off to hide in the shadows, awaiting the moment to rise again. At the slightest hint of conservatism these individuals scrabble around in their carpetbag of stock speeches, trite sayings and hackneyed phrases and produce the ubiquitous political stake and hammer. An almost orgasmic rush to plunge the stake into the suspected scion of the un-dead follows but often the target is missed and instead the vampire hunter’s own foot gets neatly pinned to the Main List for all to see.

All this medieval madness is thoroughly pointless. The Boni were never the threat that its opponents painted them out to be. They were a group of very conservative citizens who saw the need to defend the primacy of the Religio as a state religion, to protect the Collegium Pontificum from attempts to either dismantle or cripple it, and to promote the mos maiorum. I wish I could say that the Boni was as organised and focused as its opponents make out, but this was not the case.

The Boni were never a political party but in an apparent triumph of propaganda the opponents of the Boni obviously have now fed well and too long on the various distortions that were deliberately propagated. The Libra and the Moderati have presented a far more unified and political platform than the Boni ever managed to do. In that respect the Boni were the most Roman of factions and its opponents have constructed a well oiled and disciplined party machine to combat a myth.

The one success of the Boni was to unknowingly befuddle its opponents into believing that it was organised, and the willing abettors in the spread of that most delicious rumour was in fact those people that form the Moderati and the Libra. The Boni have crumbled to dust and left the Moderati and Libra in full possession of the field.

The trouble is that having whipped up some of the villagers into a state of hysteria over Count Bonus and consistently maintained the Main List at a state of red alert, they now don’t believe that the monster is a small pile of dust in the corner. These people with the objective of destroying the Boni have invested too much time and effort to simply give up and go home. Life as an unemployed vampire hunter pales by comparison and certainly lacks the rush that they no doubt experienced in the full flow of combative Main List posting.

Despite the profusion of olive branches and the various statements of good intent they are still caressing their stakes and fingering their hammers. They are still rooting around in the graveyards of Nova Roman political life hoping to catch a glance of the un-dead, so they can start the whole tiresome process again.

What may happen now is that those that echo conservative views maybe pursued and pinned with a large stake for all to witness. Never mind the fact that these people never were members of the Boni. Never mind they may be new citizens. Never mind that the Libra Alliance spokesman could equally say much of what they say and suffer no verbal assaults. Our vampire hunters need targets, they have an adrenaline addiction to feed and sooner or later it will surface unless they face the reality of a post-Boni political landscape.

The way ahead for Nova Roma this year has to be to increase the numbers of its citizens, seek innovative ways to raise money, which do not involve grants thereby compromising our independence, and to make a conscious effort to stop terrifying the populace with all these tales of blood sucking wraiths lurking under the bed.

If those olive branches were genuinely proffered then the stakes and hammers have to be put away. The price we will all pay if this doesn’t happen is another year of unbridled enmity. The continued existence of two political machines, the Libra and Moderati, founded to combat the myth of an organised and effective Boni is itself a testament to how myopic some people can be.

A spoonful of sugar from Brussels?

2005-01-02T13:11:00.000-07:00

I suppose I could start by saying that the excitement of the elections is now over, however excitement would be too dramatic an adjective. Not all positions were filled, few were actively contested and generally it remained a damp squib.

The minor distraction of Maior managing to demonstrate that she is an excellent markswoman when aiming at her own foot was the only relief in an otherwise drab affair.

It is impossible to say what lies ahead for the coming year. The Libra Alliance were short on details but long on promises to be very traditional. Only time and an insight into their legislative platform will provide hints as to the veracity of this claim.

Our new senior Consul, Franciscus Apulus Caesar seems to hanker after obtaining grants from the European Union. In order to do that he has said Nova Roma will need to be incorporated in Europe.

We don’t need grants. We need citizens that stay and participate. If all our listed citizens paid their taxes that would provide sufficient relief for the moment. We also want to avoid being subject to review by macronational governmental bodies (or is that busybodies?) interfering in our internal affairs and laying down conditions for grants or how they can be spent. Apulus Caesar may see no matters of concern here, but he is so deeply enmeshed in the European Union that he is far from objective on the matter.

As for our Praetors, it will be interesting so see if they try to extend Nova Roma’s judicial reach into columns like this one, or private lists. In keeping with Nova Victoriana that some seem so dedicated to building on the bones of Nova Roma, the “Nanny knows best” approach to life in Nova Roma continues to remain the biggest single threat to popular liberty.

The odious characters that worked Madame Guillotine all wore caps of liberty. Just because someone is plebeian and a former Tribune (or a current one) doesn’t mean that they have any real concept of popular liberty, or the value of an uncensored and politically robust community.

We don’t need Mary Poppins as Consul feeding us spoonfuls of sugar to make the medicine of censorship and enslavement to the European Union go down our throats more easily.

The torch of traditionalism

2004-12-22T20:42:00.001-07:00

It was formally announced by Quintus Fabius Maximus today that the Boni is defunct. This is not a good thing as Nova Roma has lost the one organized faction that was committed to upholding the mos maiorum and defending the rights and authority of the Collegium Pontificum. It is true that the Libra Alliance has laid claim to traditionalism, but that is likely to prove to have been an electoral ploy to ensure they could compete on the same turf as the Boni.

The responsibility for defending the mos and the Collegium now falls upon the shoulders of all conservative minded citizens. It will not be an easy task, nor at times a pleasant one. The Boni collectively and as individuals faced vilification and threats that amounted to a form of persecution from certain magistrates and this may carry over to any individual that picks up the torch of traditionalism. It is however a worthwhile and necessary watch that must be maintained.

Optimate smugness

2004-12-16T10:33:00.000-07:00

At first sight the paucity of the Libra Alliance's policies make it seem indeed trite. The very absence of substance in favor of a faint whiff of European Union froth is suspicious.

Of course there had to be something more, so a return to their website and a re-examination of the sketchy comments was in order. Lo and behold, there it was buried in Point 5 of their "Platform", the key to how they think and what lies in front of us:

"At this period in Nova Roma's history, we have to protect the rights of the populus".

Of course they have to protect us. Nova Roma is just teeming with demagogues and tyrants. On a regular basis people are persecuted and thrown into exile for offering the slightest resistance to the ruling clique. Aren't they?

Strange, I never felt persecuted or oppressed. So if it isn't happening now, well the Libra's must have (in keeping with their astrological name) equipped themselves with a crystal ball and seen that this state of doom was about to fall on Nova Roma in the near future. From who does this threat emanate?

Well of course it has to be the Boni! They are responsible for just about every plot against the people of Nova Roma. Such a wicked governing party! Oh, yes that is right, they are not the governing party! So it can't be the Boni can it?

The Libra Alliance has thrown their magic political fairy dust into the air and into the faces of the voters of Nova Roma and conjured up some mythical tyrant. I am sure that when pressed they will say it is a purely preventative commitment, unless they intend to target the Collegium Pontificum, since that is the only body that has consistently opposed the attempts of the Libra to mangle the mos maiorum in respect of the Religio,

They quote Polybius and thoughtfully provide a link, so here are a few extracts from his work they rely on and base they ideology on:

"The people again, on their part, are held in dependence on the senate, both to the particular members, and to the general body"

"The people, therefore, being by these means held under due subjection and restraint, and doubtful of obtaining that protection, which they foresee that they may at some time want, are always cautious of exciting any opposition to the measures of the senate"

So Nova Roma is breeding its own clique of optimates. What the Libra's choose to ignore is that in this fascinating balance that Polybius describes the usual checks that the populace had over the Senate and the magistrates simply don't exist in Nova Roma. No secession of the people would make on whit of difference to our gang of optimates. A refusal to pay taxes would just disenfranchise the opponents of the Libras. Few of us are in a position to camp out on their front lawns with placards condemning abuses of power.

It is interesting to note the only exercise of authoritarian power, is that being cooked up to remove Lucius Sicinius Drusus from the senate and send him into exile - banned from Nova Roma. Who is responsible for that? A number of key figures in the Libra Alliance as well as a few of their toadies and flunkies is the answer.

Drusus would have to go, since he consistently pricks the bloated balloon of self-satisfied smug hypocrisy that floats over the Libra camp (this incarnation is only the latest name under which this beast has been known in the past).

Nova Roma needs saving, but only from the optimate superiority of the Libra Alliance.

A damp squib

2004-12-12T22:36:00.000-07:00

The electoral process in Nova Roma is proving to be a damp squib. The Libra Alliance candidates are concentrating on the political equivalent of picking fluff out of their navels and examining it closely and intently. In large part their postings are predictable and trite.

We seem set to plunge into a year of uncertainty, with the key question of whom the pilots are going to be of this rickety old barge that the Libra's have built and climbed into. Hopefully the consular candidate Gaius Popillius Laenas will be one of them, for at least he has common sense, ability, personality and flair, qualities that will be much needed in order to keep Nova Roma afloat.

Pompeia Minucia Tiberia Strabo is already planning to extend the jurisdictional arm of the Nova Roman court system to lists not controlled by the "state". This would be a gross infringement of liberty, but of course it is portrayed as necessary in order to bring order to chaos. This Borg like "hive" mentality that the Libra's display, where what is acceptable and unacceptable falls within their own narrow definitions and misguided sense of how Romans thought and acted, is the biggest single threat to popular liberty.

There is always the possibility that someone may post something that could be construed as slanderous, but that is the price one pays for freedom of speech. Equally the poster has responsibility as well as liberty and should he fail to exercise the former sufficient remedies exist through moderation alone.

Political opposition looks set to come under fire should Strabo succeed in altering the jurisdictional limits of the law. Inevitably popular liberty will decline. People who volunteer their time as citizens simply won't tolerate or risk prosecution in the name of freedom of expression; they will leave or remain silent. Resistance will indeed prove futile and objectors will be eliminated through the blunt instrument of proscriptions or assimilated into the silent majority.

Franciscus Apulus Caesar, our Hood to Granny Nova Roma, is simply a European Union advocate. That alone should be enough to disqualify him for the rest of his natural days from any political office in an organization dedicated to the resurgence of Roman civilization. Rome and Brussels are not identical in outlook or attitude. Of course mention has been made on the lists by various people that one can only truly appreciate Rome of antiquity if one lives in modern Rome, surrounded by ruins. This is utter nonsense and reeks of nationalism, which of course runs counter to the EU ideals but since rational and logical thinking have rarely formed part of the EU mandate one should not be surprised.

Gaius Modius Athanasius is not competent to run a whelk stall, let alone Nova Roma. Despite his lack of ability or credibility it remains a possibility that he could be elected, so be prepared to sniff the air and smell that peculiar odour of rotting fish emanating from underneath the curule chair should he win.

Gaius Popillius Laenas is the only candidate that does not pose a threat to popular liberty and free speech. He is astute, balanced, conservative and truly able to work with all sides of the political spectrum.

In election of 2756 the exercise of the second vote allowed Gnaeus Equitius Marinus to rush from the rear of the poll to victory. If citizens vote for Laenas and also vote for a second candidate they run the risk of seeing him defeated. If sufficient people vote for any of the other three candidates as a first choice and sufficient number vote for that person as a second choice, their combined votes could push Laenas out of the race.

For those who are conservative and wish to elect someone who will truly honor the mos maiorum, the Religio and yet also demonstrate the ability to unify Nova Roma, there is only one rational choice; vote for Gaius Popillus Laenas and only vote for this one candidate in the consular race.

Don't go into the forest today

2004-11-30T19:46:00.000-07:00

The list of candidates for the forthcoming election grows daily. Now Franciscus Apulus Caesar has declared himself a candidate for Consul. Under his stewardship, we are informed, Nova Roma will gain a new face.

What features one wonders will that face have and how much work will the plastic surgeon have to do to achieve Apulus’s goal of leaving us lucky souls his vision of a better Nova Roma than the one he found? More significantly when Nova Roma looks in the mirror at the end of his, thankfully as yet theoretical, term will it recognise the image that stares back? Does a new face mean just a makeover or will it require a trip to the cemetery like Dr. Frankenstein to remove bits of decaying corpses? Will he just take a complete new head and try and stitch it on? Will he just take the skin and drape it over Nova Roma’s current face? What is Apulus likely to do according to the available evidence so far?

This scenario sounds like some nightmarish fairy story. Do you remember the tale of someone called Hood, who had a Granny who lived in the woods? Well let’s take a trip into the woods with Hood to visit Granny Nova Roma.

The eyes of Granny Nova will have to be exchanged. Currently they work too well. Granny Nova needs new eyes; all the worse for not seeing the slide into modernity and the cess pool that is the European Union. They will need to produce blurred and shadowy images that lack focus and depth, for how else can she not see that she is being steered onto a road that does not lead to Rome, but to Brussels?

The nose will have to go to, all the worse for not detecting the whiff of EU corruption and the dank smell of a bureaucrat’s office and Brussel sprouts. The nose that would lead to questions being asked about where these grants are going to go that apparently Hood will be applying for on Granny’s behalf. What are these networks of organizations that Granny will have to join? Would the national activities be in Italy by chance? Would they be somewhere near “Barium, which is an ancient Roman municipium in southern Italy” by chance?

The hands must be made all the worse lest they grip the trees and bushes at the side of the road, in protest at the journey Granny is going to be made to make, when she decides later she doesn’t want to go into the deep dark forest along that scary road.

The ears all the worse in case they hear those voices of dissent that say “Stop! Go back!” and the teeth sawn down to stop Granny from biting Hood should she awake to the danger that she will be in.

We all have to hope that Granny Nova asks a lot of questions and demands that Hood draw her a clear and unambiguous map of the journey she is being asked to make. She is being asked to change direction, away from a straight and sturdy route towards the bright sunlight of Roma of antiquity and instead head towards Brussels down a narrow and rutted road through a very dark forest.

Granny Nova better be very clear that once she has her face lift there is no going back and that not all plastic surgeons know what they are doing. Promises of facial beauty rarely tell of the agony of the surgical procedure or the chance of failure. Better to be a somewhat plain and simple Granny than allow Hood to turn her into a misshapen and disfigured object of scorn and pity.

Granny, don’t go into the forest today.

Constitutional crazy cat

2004-11-30T15:40:00.000-07:00

The cat is out of the bag; the Collegium Pontificum is in reality bullet resistant from all but the most determined (and likely most unconstitutional) actions. The constitution grants them exemption, it appears, from interference even by the people in comitia.

It seems likely that protections put in place at the founding of Nova Roma to protect the Religio and the Collegium from unwarranted meddling may have started ticking like an unearthed unexploded bomb.

Who will be the Consuls riding this piece of devastating ordnance to places and situations as yet unknown? If I were a candidate for the curule chair in this election I may be wondering which friendly doctor I could go to, to get a sick note to exempt me from an election that could be the equiavalent of taking the final walk to the gallows.

The Constitution and the Collegium

2004-11-29T02:31:00.000-07:00

The concept of Nova Roma having already established its own mos maiorum is an absurdity. Nova Roma is so newly established, by any yardstick let alone the span of Roman history, that we have no ancestors here whose traditions we should abide by. Of course one could just dismiss the concept at this point, but it deserves further exploration because the manner in which this erroneous assumption is being deployed in this debate is in fact contradictory.

The mos maiorum of antiquity was not static. It did change and sometimes change came abruptly and as a result of the actual or implied threat of violence. The benefit of the mos maiorum was that it laid down certain boundaries, which had the intention of inoculating the system from frequent and unnecessary changes. When change did come it was usually a "significant" issue. So did the mos maiorum bend to the people's will?

Roman politics revolved around dominant figures, on all sides of the political arena. Roman politics revolved around the client/patron relationship. Roman politics included tactics such as bribery, intimidation and subsequently murder. Roman politics did not include organized political parties where your average plebeian Roman could sign on the slate and have a voice. The Roman voting system was designed to ensure that only patricians or moneyed and influential plebeians had a real effect on the outcome of the vote. Democracy this was not.

We can surmise that there must have been occasions when the people passed laws that faced little or no opposition from the Senate, and may indeed have had their "blessing" – probably because those that sponsored them had already secured Senatorial support. Not every change to the mos maiorum was likely to have been dramatic showcase politics and dangerous stand-offs. Some of the changes were no doubt mundane in nature and impact.

If the mos maiorum did bend to the will of the people on occasion it is probably more valuable to ask in turn whose will or bidding did the "people" do? To refine it further on these occasions was this really the "people" as the whole adult enfranchised body or smaller segments that became labelled as the "people", when we could be talking about a vociferous minority. So again, it is likely that democracy this was not.

Returning to the absurdity of our having our own mos maiorum, if the mos maiorum of antiquity could be changed then the mos maiorum of Nova Roma can be changed. Now some of the proponents of women pontifices claim that the Collegium Pontificum has changed the mos maiorum of Nova Roma by adopting the stance that it has done on women pontifices.

Rather than look to the mos maiorum of antiquity or the supposed modern mythical one, let us instead look to the Constitution of Nova Roma. Maybe there is something in this document that can cast a different perspective (I don't recall any of what follows being covered before...but who knows as it appears this thread is infinite in nature)?

Section VI.B.1.c of the Constitution states that the Collegium has the power to regulate its own internal affairs and that such decreta that are passed cannot be overruled by laws passed in any of the comitia or by Senatus consultum. Is this in conflict with Section I.B? There are two interpretations. Firstly that Section I.B stands "supreme" and overrides all other sections, or second that it does not and Section VI.B.1.c cannot be overridden by any other clause. The assumption of the supremacy of Section I.B cannot be made on the basis of what the section says, for it made provision for conflicting laws but does not include any provision for overruling any other part of the constitution that may conflict with it. Therefore one can only turn to either the wording, the spirit of the constitution or both for some guidance.

"This Constitution shall be the highest legal authority within Nova Roma, apart from edicts issued by a legally appointed dictator" establishes the precedence of the constitution over all other laws and edicts, apart from those of a legally appointed dictator, yet since the rights of the Collegium Pontificum to regulate its own affairs are granted within the constitution does this section "trump" Section VI.B.1.c? I don't believe it does for that section grants those rights specifically to the collegium. The specific grant overrides the general restriction. In other words even if the Collegium passes decreta that appear to conflict with the constitution, this very grant of an exclusion clause, allows the Collegium to do so, so long as the decreta relate to the regulation of its own affairs.

Section I.E does not preclude a disparity between the genders; it simply states that the use of male pronouns cannot provide the basis for a disparity to be held to exist. Section VI.B.3 enshrines the right of the Collegium to create other religious institutions and set the rules for priesthoods "in accordance with the ancient models of the Religio Romana as practiced by our spiritual ancestors". Therefore when you link the right under Section VI.B.1.c with this right, should the Collegium pass a decreta prohibiting women from becoming pontifices it would not conflict with the constitution, for nowhere in the constitution are women guaranteed any rights (then you would have one specific clause conflicting with another, and even then depending on the wording it is possible to conceive of equally strong arguments on either side for the supremacy of each clause and thus an impasse).

Does the spirit of the constitution assist us? That could have been the case had it been littered with clauses relating to the protection of the rights of female gender or indeed a flavour of what today could be described as "civil liberties". The stark fact is that there is nothing of the sort to seize upon there as guidance. Use of the "spirit" of a constitution, law or even a court order to overrule a specifically worded clause is not consistent with sound legal interpretation. I have only mentioned it at all as it may arise as an issue.

If the Collegium passes such a decreta then by the tenet of Nova Roman law, if any of the comitia attempt to pass a law overruling such a decreta that law will be unconstitutional as the supremacy of the decreta relating to internal regulation is enshrined in the constitution. By the same token should the comitia pass a law allowing in any way altering the composition of the Collegium or the manner in which pontifices are appointed or elected, then all the Collegium has to do is pass a decreta to the contrary and the law will be nullified.

Section VI.B.1.c does not limit the ability of the Collegium to react after the event, in other words it does not limit the Collegium to only having its existing decreta protected from change. The use of the word "passed" could be taken as future tense as well as past tense; "(such decreta may not be overruled by laws passed in the comitia or Senatus consultum)" can imply that decreta already passed cannot be overruled, or, that laws already in existence cannot overrule decreta yet to be passed.

There is no ambiguity here; the constitution simply doesn't preclude either. In the absence of ambiguity it is pointless to look to the spirit of the clause, but again as it maybe likely to happen anyway the spirit of Section VI.B.1.c can be said to be the protection of the right of the Collegium to regulate its own affairs. It would therefore be consistent with the spirit that the Collegium's decreta cannot be affected by either laws existing when the decreta were passed or yet to exist.

How does this relate to the mos maiorum? If the Collegium Pontificum elects to pass a decretum prohibiting women from becoming pontifices, even if Nova Roma has its own mos maiorum because the constitution is supreme the issue of changing the mos maiorum without it being the will of the people is irrelevant. The constitution subordinates the people to the will of the Collegium, so long as the Collegium only speaks to its own regulation, through making the laws in comitia subservient to the Decreta.

So the Nova Roman mos maiorum may or may not be the expression of true popular democratic feeling, or it maybe the product of wishful thinking and the frequent posting of its supposed existence by equally frequent posters to the point where some people may actually believe it exists. What ever it is, and it could be many things – were it to exist, which it doesn't – it would in any case be overruled in this matter by the constitution. As the constitution provides for the Collegium to specifically have this authority, then the Collegium Pontificum cannot be held either in the past, present or future to be acting unconstitutionally should they pass such a decretum, nor against the will of the people as expressed in the comitia.

On a final note, as I am sure it may arise, if the contitution grants the Collegium this right and the spirit of the constitition is to protect the Collegium's right and as the decreta regulating internal matters trump the comitia and Senatus consultum, then what about the Tribunes right of veto?

"To pronounce intercessio (intercession; a veto) against the actions of any other magistrate (with the exception of the dictator and the interrex), Senatus consulta, magisterial edicta, religious decreta, and leges passed by the comitia when the spirit and/or letter of this Constitution or legally-enacted edicta or decreta, Senatus Consulta or leges are being violated thereby;"

So - the Tribunes cannot pronounce intercessio unless the spirit/letter of the constitution is being violated. In the case of the Collegium regulating it's own affairs, the Constitution provides
for this, so in fact if the duty of the Tribunes is to protect the constitution (as some argued) then logically those same people must accept that in this case should the Collegium pass a decretum prohibiting women from being pontifices, then the Tribunes should in fact defend that decretum against any attempt to pass a law in the comitia or a Senatus consultum.

What about a Dictator or even an attempt to change the constitution? As to the latter, an attempt to change the constitution could be seen as a violation of the spirit of the constitution as it exists now, and therefore the Tribunes would be bound to defend it and pronounce intercessio (according to those who say that is their duty above all others and they don't have the right to decide whether to pronounce or not). Once appointed the Tribunes cannot pronounce intercessio against the actions of the Dictator, but they can pronounce intercessio against his or her appointment.

Just a few things to ponder over.

Gallic war treasures

2004-11-27T23:21:00.000-07:00

BORDEAUX, France (AFP) - French archaeologists said this week they had discovered an exceptional Gallic war treasure in the south of the country, including rare war trumpets and ornate helmets.

The some 470 objects, or fragments of objects, were found at the end of September during a dig at Naves, in the department of Correze in southern France, in a ditch hollowed out of a Gallic-Roman temple, they said.

Link

The pretentiousness of togas and titles

2004-11-26T00:24:00.000-07:00

The resurgence of the debate over the role of women in the Religio highlights the chasm that exists in Nova Roma between the traditionalists and the modernists. In order to understand fully the forces at work it is necessary to examine what definitions can be applied to both labels.

A Nova Roman "modernist" is someone who looks to the constitution, rather than the mos maiorum of antiquity, and to the dictates of today's macronational western societies for guidance in issues of reconstruction.

A Nova Roman "traditionalist" is someone who looks to the mos maiorum of antiquity as the first point of reference, who believes that for true and stable reconstruction to occur the templates of antiquity must be strictly applied, and who looks to the social standards of antiquity for guidance in the development of gender roles and responsibilities.

The debate over women pontifices has seen the modernists advance three basic arguments. Firstly there is no known historical social or religious barrier to women being appointed as pontifices. Secondly that Nova Roma once had female pontifices and to deny others that right would be a violation of the "new" mos maiorum of Nova Roma. Thirdly that to deny women would be a breach of the social mores of this modern age and a contradiction of the roles that women do play in our res publica.

In respect of the first, the historical context of women in the Religio is clear. They held minor priesthoods or where their roles were greater were in foreign cults as thus of no significance to their role in the Religio Romana. The Vestal Virgins were the exception, but were themselves subject to the authority of a male - the Pontifex Maximus. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest women ever occupied these roles. The question then devolves into an analysis of whether their absence was deliberate through taboos or due to the then social inequality that women faced.

There were considerable restrictions placed on women in general, both in respect of their legal subordinate status and morals. This was particularly true of patrician women, but even though plebeian females enjoyed a greater degree of license they were generally still subject to the potestas of males. Females could not perform blood sacrifices, which is an obvious taboo and an obvious bar to their participation in the Religio of antiquity. This fact alone clearly demonstrates that their exclusion from the role of pontifex was not due to the socio/political conditions of the day, but rather to a deliberate prohibition.

The second argument, that of the breach of the modern mos maiorum is fatuous nonsense. We are collectively staggering around in the dark trying to pick up the few remaining pieces of evidence whilst wearing boxing gloves. Mistakes are bound to happen and only a fool or a crafty politician would try to bind us to live with the results of those mistakes. It really is as silly as saying that a man who never had a gas oven before, sticks his head in after leaving the gas on for five minutes and then strikes a match, is bound to use this method ever after in spite of the injuries and damage this erroneous method causes.

There is only one mos maiorum - that of Rome of antiquity. This is the one that we can follow with a considerable amount of certainty due to this being the tried and tested model that survived for over two thousand years. Yes there were changes, some gradual and some abrupt, but the Religio remained intact and could even be said by its critics and detractors to be ossified, but that is the very strength of it; a largely unchanging and stable nature and one that did not entertain the idea of women being pontifices. Such is the nature of the pax deorum.

The third bag of tricks the modernists produce is that of the customs of today. The insidious creep of alien concepts into the life of Nova Roma is one of the most dangerous counterpoints to reconstruction. The modernists want the trappings of Rome of antiquity without the substance and responsibilities. For the modernists it is all about the pretensions of togas and titles. If they are non-practitoners then they find it so much easier to dismiss tradition and propose the introduction of concepts that would rend asunder the hope of re-establishing the Religio. We either are committed to a true reconstruction or to an abortion of a cocktail of ideas that would constitute an inexpiable impietas prudens dolo malo.

The traditionalists face a foe that would transform Nova Roma into a parody, a comedy of errors. It is very hard though to identify those modernists who are simply foolish, those who are gamers and those who are malicious sprites. Regardless of the inability to clearly label them, collectively they all pose a grave danger to the res publica which cannot be ignored.

Women and the Religio - a thesis

2004-11-25T22:17:00.000-07:00

This conclusion of this thesis, which provides a concise synopis of the role of women in the Religio and cults, is that women had clearly defined and limited roles, which did not extend to being pontifices. Additionally women were not allowed to perform blood sacrifices, which of course would have meant that they were excluded from the majority of rites.

The conclusion that any sensible and unbiased person would reach after reading this modest work, is that if the Religio is to be accurately reconstructed, then women cannot be pontifices. Of course common sense has very little to do with the modernistic position on this issue, or indeed any other that we have wrestled with in Nova Roma.

Link

A choice between tradition or trend

2004-11-24T19:36:00.000-07:00

The long awaited report by Pontifex Gaius Iulius Scaurus on whether female pontifices should be appointed was released today by the Pontifex Maximus, Marcus Cassius Iulianus. The report concluded that "adlection of female pontifices will violate fundamental gender taboos of the Religio and constitute an inexpiable impietas prudens dolo malo". That means no they should not be appointed, for to do so would be an act of malicious impiety against the Gods which could never be forgiven. Scaurus cited primary historical sources as well as secondary sources as evidence for his conclusions. The Pontifex Maximus, not surprisingly disagreed with his findings.

The issue is simple. Do we ignore the absence of female pontifices in Rome of antiquity and the evidence Scaurus a university professor in a classical discipline has amassed, in favour instead of modern sensibilities and political agendas?

Women today have equal rights in most Western style democratic countries, though some would argue that is only in theory since, we are told, bastions of male domination still exist in all areas of human life. Let us however accept the theory of equality as true.

One could argue that as Nova Roma is based on reconstruction of laws, philosophies and a social fabric from a period over 2000 years ago it should be cut and dried that women cannot expect to assume the rights they enjoy outside of Nova Roma. One could indeed argue that but of course someone else will cite macronational law, "decency", the fact the Nova Roma only takes the best of Rome, to name but a few of the protests, to demonstrate that women should be adlected as pontifices. Add to this veritable mixing bowl a unhealthy dose of Nova Roman politics and the resultant dough that rises in the oven of our debate is bitter and rancid.

The most fundamental principle that underpins Nova Roma's existence is reconstruction. Without this goal, we are truly nothing more than an eclectic collection of mummers, drifting through a convoluted dance of mimicry and self-delusion, however even on this very basic principle we cannot find common ground. The cherry pickers are in the orchard selecting the fruit of their choice, discarding the older crop and preferring instead either the unseasoned fruit, or as in this case not even the cherry but the cranberry.

The modernists have no alternative, they have to be selective for if they were to be true to the dictates and needs of reconstruction they would have to swallow many a bitter pill that would slowly (and thankfully) poison this monstrosity that they are building. This lumbering and shambling pale reflection of Rome hoves into view and female pontifices are just another plank in this nonsensical sham.

Even in this modern world, where everyone wants everything and believes in nothing that smacks of tradition, there are some things that people simply cannot grab for themselves. Scaurus will no doubt be condemned for his findings, though really few can be surprised since the result was such a self-evident truism that the only amazing fact is that we had to impose on this scholar's time at all to render a verdict that should have been obvious, even to the most half-witted. This is one of those areas where the "gimme now" philosophy has no place. Reconstruction means just that; not taking bits of antiquity (and precious few at that) and large doses of modernism and mixing them all together.

No doubt it will be an unpopular view amongst some cives, but women have no historic basis as pontifices and therefore since we are reconstructing what was, then we must do just that and not impose modern standards and principles. If we do the latter then we are only fooling ourselves that we are rebuilding Rome, for we are not but are in fact building a monstrosity of impiety and historic inaccuracy.

For those of the Religio, the risk of participating in a inexpiable impietas prudens dolo malo should be too great a risk, just in order to satisfy the demands of modernity, politics and personal ambition.

Nova Roma has as its bedrock antiquity, not modernity and that fact carries with it certain consequences, one of which is that women should not be pontifices. If the consequences of historic accuracy are so distressing then clearly those that feel that made a mistake in becoming Nova Roman citizens.

If you are interested in the triumph of traditionalism, then you should applaud the report. If you are a modernist, recreating that mess of modern society in Nova Roma then no doubt you will be condemning it. Two camps. Two clearly distinct views of what the methodology of reconstruction is.

Nova Roma must stand fast and hold to the line of traditional reconstruction. No to impiety and no to avaricious grasping of that that never was and therefore never should be.

Caligula in technicolour

2004-11-23T01:18:00.000-07:00

The ancients: now available in colour Classical statues are being restored to their original glory.

John Hooper reports Monday November 22, 2004

The Guardian

The new white... a reproduction of the goddess Athena, right, next to the original. Photo: Renate Kuhling/AP For hundreds of years, Caligula's handsome, marble face has stared out at a fascinated world. Now situated at the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek museum in Copenhagen, the celebrated first-century bust of this cruel young Roman emperor is made repellent, yet intriguing, not so much by his petulantly downturned mouth as by the blank, staring eyes chiselled from marble by an unknown sculptor.

It comes as a shock to be confronted with an exact replica with unthreatening hazel eyes. Add garish pink skin and glossy brown hair, and the new painted version of Caligula's bust looks as if it might once have been used to model hats in thewindow of a men's outfitters. Yet, according to the curators of a new exhibition at the Vatican museums, this is a lot closer to what the sculptor intended we see than the white marble to which we are accustomed.

more...

Link

The scales of naked ambition

2004-11-22T01:21:00.000-07:00

So the elections are looming in Nova Roma. The last time I checked the slate for the Libra Alliance was empty. Tiberius Galerius Paulinus has declared himself a candidate for Praetor, Gaius Equitius Cato for Quaestor and Gaius Modius Athanasius for Consul.

As to the latter, I find it hard to suppress a loud snort of derision. Gnaeus Equitius Marinus, even though I have disagreed with his policies on numerous occasions, has more consular material in his little finger than Modius Athanasius does in his entire body.

Modius Athanasius would divide Nova Roma even further (if that is possible) because he cannot let go of his own personal issues with other citizens. Modius Athanasius talks often of peace and mending fences, and then proceeds in various posts to smash down the few remaining parts of the fence that exist. Modius Athanasius wants to matter, and there is really nothing wrong in that, but there has to be something else that a candidate offers to counter naked ambition for "power" (however you want to define that in Nova Roma).

The scales are weighed heavily to the floor on the side of Modius Athanasius's personal ambition but the measure of a consul was never added to the other side of the balance. That yardstick includes, but is not limited to, political maturity, a large measure of dignitas and auctoritas, not to mention a candidate that is level headed and analytical. In my estimation Modius Athanasius comes up woefully short on all of these counts.

Ovid re-worked

2004-11-18T01:01:00.000-07:00

Review
A fresh take on Roman classic
Set designs and strong performances make the American Stage's Metamorphoses, a retelling of poet Ovid's stories, a lively morality lesson.

By MARTY CLEAR
Published November 14, 2004

Link

Mastiha - an ancient spice

2004-11-17T23:27:00.000-07:00

Apparently this ancient spice, once used as a spice for wine and as a breath freshener, is making a comeback.

Link

Liberace lives!

2004-11-17T21:37:00.000-07:00

As the months have worn on it has become clear that there is a Cold War in progress in Nova Roma. Some of course would be quick to attribute that solely to the Boni, and not surprisingly these people would be the adherents of the Moderati. Others with a more perspicacious grasp of the subtleness of human dynamics would conclude that in a political environment, such as Nova Roma, division into camps is inevitable. Now we all know that Aulus Apollonius Cordus thinks that these groups are subversive and that if he had a chance he would ban the lot of them, but in reality nothing will ever prevent people from forming into factions.

The debates of the summer certainly carved the lines of division in Nova Roma onto the stone slabs of our virtual community. The Volcanus list, became the no-name group, finally morphing into the Moderati. The Optimates appeared and were extinguished within the space of days (but then who knows whether in some dark virtual hole they are not at this moment huddled, "plotting").

Now we have the Libra Alliance. Did the Moderati get sucked into the Librae? If so should it not be the Liberati? That name reminds me of Liberace and now I mentally picture all the notables of that group dressed in outrageously sequined costumes with high collars and flowing cloaks, flashing brilliant white-toothed smiles, and with an abundance of rings adorning their fingers.

When I read what they stood for I knew for certain that Liberace lives. The platitudes that are billed as a "platform" are statements that most Nova Romans could agree with. There is nothing dynamic or enlightening to be found there. I can only conclude that in the total absence of a meaningful platform the Libra exist solely to perpetuate the re-election of the same set of magistrates that have signed onto the Good Ship Libra, or their chosen successors. Who said patronage doesn't exist in Nova Roma? If it does there is nothing wrong with that, but let us call a spade a spade and then identify the Alliance as a self-interest group rather than a serious force for historic development in Nova Roma

Many people from all sides of the political arena recognize that at some point we have to steer Nova Roma in a direction other than the circular one it has followed for the last two years or so. The divisions start when we have to look at the compass and choose a heading. One could not even say that the courses on offer were roughly headed in the same direction, or even in the same quadrant of the compass. The Libras include people who would have few qualms, in my opinion, in taking Nova Roma in a decidedly un-historic direction if they thought it was popular.

Of course one could ask what is popular? There are so few active political posters in Nova Roma that judging the mood of the electorate is a theoretical exercise. As there are three camps, the conservatives, the modernists and the "don't cares" one could look for the ubiquitous floating voter but does such a creature exist in Nova Roma? Probably not given the nature of posts and the election results. So what is popular really means what is popular to the modernist camp.

The forthcoming elections will be a real test of where Nova Roma will head for the next few years, either into the melting pot of modernist experimentation or towards a historic recreation of Roman society and culture. The Libra Alliance do not offer the path to the stars, not unless those are the stars boxers see when they have been walloped a few times.

The Libra Alliance is the path to the glitzy and tawdry politics of this modern age. It is the path to flashing white-toothed smiles attached to a pair of legs, all gleam and no body. They may have the very best interests of Nova Roma at heart, as they say they do, but given the paucity of their policies one can only conclude that it is the heart of a flea, rather than that of an eagle.

Until something more substantial appears in their policy statement, it seems that a vote for the Libras is a vote for the Liberaces of Nova Roman politics.

Now an irrelevant court

2004-11-16T10:19:00.000-07:00

Mention has been made of the need for a constitutional court. Sadly since we are currently encumbered by this wretched and ineffective constitution, it is no surprise that the proposed remedy to all the inconsistencies is a court. Never mind there was no such beast in ancient Rome, since there was no constitution, the monster needs to be controlled so lets create a superfluous and irrelevant group and call it a court

If I take a potato and call it a carrot and paint it red, what is it? It remains a potato. Taking a bunch of butchers, bakers and candlestick makers in Nova Roma and putting them on a Yahoo list and calling the list a court is nonsensical. You can’t make someone into a lawyer or a judge by giving him a title. You can’t imbue him with the skills necessary to analyse legal documents, or in our case one that purports to be a legal document.

Therefore why do we need to call the Yahoo list or email list that will be created to service this collection of well meaning amateur Rumpoles, a court? Simply, because it increases the measure of self-importance some people attach to their functions in Nova Roma.

Despite all the best efforts of our future Judges, they will remain a humble bag of potatoes.

The constitution - an exercise in irrelevance

2004-11-16T01:47:00.000-07:00

The current debate on the Main List concerning the supremacy, or otherwise, of the Nova Roman constitution once more brings back into focus the actual need for such a document in Nova Roma. The main arguments in favour of a constitution are:

We need it, as the corporate status of NR requires that by-laws be established, and these by-laws should enshrine the immutable principles.

We need it, as it provides a defence against hypothetical unscrupulous officials in Nova Roma who may one day try to usurp the functions of the “state”.

We need it, as it is a temporary stop-gap until the populace of Nova Roma develop sufficient Romanitas for a resurrected mos maiorum to safely replace it, as the principles enshrined in the mos which would be part written, part oral tradition (most of us know for example it is not appropriate to urinate in the middle of a shopping mall – it is simply “not done”) would replace the constitutional protections enshrined in the current document.

We need it, because as a micronation it is appropriate that people have a clear sense of what the guiding principles are and have one clear and unambiguous source for ultimate protection of their “rights”.

There are various other variations on the above themes that I could, but won’t, list. So do we need it for one or all of the above reasons? I could construct arguments one-way or the other. I will simplify this though.

Nova Roma is a voluntary organisation. Ultimately everything exists inside of NR because the citizens (members) will it to exist. They accord it all the rights and privileges that it claims for itself and its officials, by consent. All sorts of dire circumstances could conspire to produce a rogue official, but what is the worst such a person could do? What is the extent of his power to harm a citizen of Nova Roma?

Zero is the answer. If everyone refused to acknowledge him or accord him any of those rights and privileges, then even if the entire Senate had fallen asleep and failed miserably to protect the people, and even if the people themselves in their comitia failed miserably to protect themselves, action by sufficient key citizens to ignore such a rogue would reduce him to impotence.

All power in NR derives from the people, its citizens. By all means enshrine certain key points in a set of by-laws (a very much truncated form of the current constitution) and leave the remainder as a set of guiding principles – the initial component of the restored mos maiorum Since the people can change everything, including the by-laws, in Nova Roma, it makes a constitution as a guarantor of rights and institutions pointless. If the people collectively decide to call the Senate the Klingon High Council and substitute titles from Star Trek for Roman ones, and make worship of Kahless the official religion, no constitution or law in Nova Roma will stop them. So designing an armour-plated defence against mass insanity of the populace is a pointless exercise. Designing a single document, as a defence against rogue magistrates is unnecessary – just ignore them.

Too much time, effort and angst is expended on worrying about this wretched document. It is unnecessary, un-roman and ineffective. At some point we have to trust to the common sense of the people to defend the institutions and principles of Nova Roma, and to their developing sense of Romanitas. Since we cannot prevent the people from destroying Nova Roma should they so choose, we are only left with the option of trust. If we all accepted that simple fact, life in Nova Roma would become so much more bearable and more historic to boot.