COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

The social and political heart of the respublica community

Moderators: Publius Iunius Brutus, Lucius Aurelius Curio, Titus Flavius Severus, Lucius Livius Seneca, Marcus Flavius Celsus, Tiberia Salvia Alba

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Gnaeus Iulius Caesar » Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:56 am

The download links are broken.
User avatar
Gnaeus Iulius Caesar
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:07 pm

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Titus Flavius Severus » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:12 am

Not really. There's just no automatic link when hovering, but the link itself is correct, in order to get the necessary document, you just need to insert this before the link to the required document: "http://www.romanrepublic.org/forum/"

Here are the correct automatic links for downloading:

I. Election of TWO Curule Aedile (responsibilities of this office are outlined here: download/file.php?id=233)
II. Election of SIX Quaestores (responsibilities of this office are outlined here: download/file.php?id=250)
Quae medicamenta non sanat, ferrum sanat; quae ferrum non sanat, ignis sanat. Quae vero ignis non sanat, insanabilia reputari oportet...
User avatar
Titus Flavius Severus
Consul
Consul
Senator
Senator
Sarmatia Magna
Sarmatia Magna
Cultus Mithrae
Cultus Mithrae
Lictor Curiatus
Lictor Curiatus
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:24 am
Location: SARMATIA MAGNA

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Aula Flavia Philippa » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:34 am

The People and the Senate of Rome, I come out to you to declare my intention to become the Curule Aedile of the Roman Republic!
I'm new to the world of Roman politics. However, I decided to start my Cursus Honorum, my way of the public service, from the position of the Plebeian Tribune, since this magistracy, in my opinion, is the least connected with politics, in the literal sense of the word. However, I failed in the last elections and was not elected to this post. Nevertheless, persistence and perseverance is a character trait characteristic of true Romans, therefore, following the Roman spirit, I decided that I can benefit society as Curule Aedile. As I said before, the Roman society is built on the foundation of people's associations, so the common people are the foundation of the modern Roman Republic, that is why, I believe that protection and preservation of integrity, well-being of the common people is the foundation for the development of the Republic of Rome, a pledge of development and progress.
On Curule Aedile are assigned important powers that help the development of civil associations, strengthen the interaction between them. The development of such associations of citizens is the development of the Roman Republic. I am a follower of the Mithra Cult, for which order and public consent is important. I have experience in organizing public events within our historical reconstruction community - the Legio XI, which will be good and useful to me if I am will be elected to this magistracy.
User avatar
Aula Flavia Philippa
Curule Aedile
Curule Aedile
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 9:19 pm
Location: Sarmatia Magna Prov.

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Lucius Flavius Avitus » Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:14 pm

Dear citizens, the People of Rome! Today I stand before you in order to put forward my candidacy for the post of Quaestor.
The speech of Dominus Titus Flavius Severus made a significant impression on me, so I could not stay away and responded to his call. I would like to make my contribution to the common cause of the formation and development of our Glorious Republic, so I decided that service for the benefit of society is the best way to do it. Questura, this is the such magistracy, where you can show yourself the best way, gain knowledge and experience.
I meet all the necessary requirements for a candidate for this position. In addition, I'm pretty good at video shooting and editing, so I think my knowledge can be useful to our Republic and its People. I am engaged in historical reenactment in the 11th Legion and have not bad knowledge on Roman history. My only disadvantage for this post is poor knowledge of English, however, I use online translators, so if you read this my speech, then everything is not so bad with my English and I can perform all the necessary duties assigned to the quaestor.
Lucius Flavius Avitus
Quaestor
Quaestor
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Tiberius Iulius Nerva » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:29 am

Salvete omnes!

I hereby announce my candidacy for the office of the Quaestor.

My name is Tiberius Iulius Nerva, I come from Czechia or Czech Republic if you want. In RR this is provincia Pannonia territory now.

I am roman citizen since 2011 in Nova Roma, where I held office of quaestor and Plebeian Aedile. Four years later I entered Roman Republic thanks Publius Iunius Brutus which I can call my friend and I am really glad for it. He is true Roman and ideal for me. He created wonderful place where Romans can continue their work after NR corporate collapse. I feel duty help this organization to be more prosperous. That is why I would like to start Cursus Honorum in the Roman Republic.

I declare also that I will do as much as I can to create another functional centre in middle Europe. There is huge gap in space of western and middle Europe.

Valete bene!

Tiberius Iulius Nerva
User avatar
Tiberius Iulius Nerva
Quaestor
Quaestor
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 8:14 am
Location: Provincia Marcomannia, Czech Republic

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Octavius Aburnius Gracilis » Tue Nov 21, 2017 1:59 am

Salve,
I am Octavius Aburnius Gracilis and I'm running for the position of Quaestor. I would like to become Quaestor so that I can help the Roman Republic in anyway possible. I have a heart for service and especially service to the people of the Republic. In addition to the responsibilities of Quaestor, I will work with other citizens to create a Collegium for Craftsman and Craftswomen, along with a Collegium for Christian members. Every vote is deeply appreciated
, Gratias vobis ago mi amici.
Octavius Aburnius Gracilis
Quaestor
Quaestor
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:35 am

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Gaius Cominius Laenas » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:14 am

C. Cominius Laenas Quaest. Urb. omnibus salutem plurimam dicit.

PAST SERVICE:

I have donated much of my private monies to the RR. I have been recognized for these acts by bring admitted to the Equestrian Order last year.

I have served this year as Quaestor Urbanus. In this role I have assisted with running elections and with the maintenance of the website. I have also regularly reviewed all denarii transactions and helped prepare the annual budget for the RR. I have been kindly rewarded this year by our good Censors with a position in the senate.

Prior to serving as Senator and Quaestor Urbanus my skills were retained by the founding patricians of the RR. In this role I was the chief designer of all the various online aspects of the RR. This year, this work was recognized by the senate and they awarded me the first Corona Rostrata. I wear this honor with much pride.

MY PLEDGE FOR THE FUTURE:

I come before this honorable community and the leaders of Roman cultural restorationism to petition your support in my quest to serve as CURULE AEDILE next year.

In the Curule Aedile is the chief magistrate responsible for the website. As the creator of the website it is natural that I assume this position. I would like to upgrade portions of the website and assemble a working team of Quaestors and scribes to make this a joint effort.

I also support Collegia reform. But I do not support the policies towards this ends advocated by our current Praetor, K. Cispius Laevus. His heart is in the right place. But we need to consult the citizens and collegia first. I suggest creating a new societas open only to collegia leaders and magistrates. This societas would determine what resources the collegia need and how they can be best supported. The various recommendations made will then be put before the Concilium Plebis directly with the hopeful support of the Plebeian Aediles. The opinion of the Concilium Plebis can then be determined and supported proposals presented to the senste.

I think we need to refound the ludi factions. They are a pale shadow of what they could be. Ludi factions should serve as social clubs. Different interests can be represented by the various factions. Therefore, they can be active even between ludi and do real cultural work and projects. The faction that does the best inside and outside the ludi should also be awarded.

We must get the market place working. I will work with the senate that recently formed a committee to get this process moving forward. I will use my web development skills to assist towards this goal.


If you have questions or comments, then please reply. I hope I can count on your support during this comitia.
User avatar
Gaius Cominius Laenas
Senator
Senator
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 5:24 am
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Lucius Livius Seneca » Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:11 pm

L. Livius Ani. Seneca quaest. cons. omnibus Quiritibus in foro s.p.d.

My fellow citizens, while most of us will, no doubt, be following the elections of next year's quaestors and aediles with great interest, I wish to address you concerning other business which currently stands before this assembly: namely, the two leges which have been proposed by the Senate, and now require the approval of the Roman people in order to become law.

It is with the utmost concern for our Republic, its future, and its institutions that I must speak out against both of these proposed pieces of legislation, and urge all of you to vote against their adoption.

  1. First, let us consider the Lex Cispia-Furia de societatibus. While this lex may have merit in its own right, it still must not be ratified by this assembly for one obvious reason: it is only half of an intended legislative reform. Anyone following the proceedings of the Senate will know that, in addition to this lex reforming our societates, K. Cispio also introduced a "sister law" simultaneously reforming our collegia as well. This second lex, however, failed to receive the approval of the Senate, and so now, the Conscript Fathers have advanced to us only half of the legislation needed to complete the praetor's intended reform.

    We needn't even bother to consider the details of this lex Cispia-Furia which we have been asked to approve, for one simple reason: §IX.a of this proposed law states:

    Lex Cispia-Furia de societatibus, §IX. a wrote:Once passed by the senate and comitia tributa by a majority this lex replaces LEX CURIATORUM: On the creation and regulation of Collegium and Societas. (http://www.romanrepublic.org/forum/down ... php?id=249)

    By passing this law we will abolish the current lex Curiatorum, and replace it with this new lex Cispia-Furia. New regulations will therefore be in place for our societates, but nothing will exist to govern collegia. They will simply cease to exist as a legal reality, because the accompanying legislation intended for them was rejected by the Senate.

    As such, we the citizenry must reject this half-measure from the Senate, and ask the Conscript Fathers to actually finish their reforms in the future before advancing them to the people.

  2. We now turn our critical eye to the Lex Flavia de legione. As he explained in the Curia, T. Severus proposed this law to structure the revival of the Roman military tradition in our Republic, alongside its developing civil and religious institutions. I applauded the censor's insight in curating this fundamental aspect of Roman culture, and his further brilliance in investing it with the duty of propagating the Declaration and promoting recruitment. Our nation is in dire need of a public relations and marketing department, and embedding these activities within the military tradition is a stroke of genius.

    The lex Flavia, however, is simply too limited and shortsighted to achieve this lofty aim. It is a poorly crafted piece of legislation, the reasons for which I will explain below:

    1. It is a vague and ambiguous text: Laws should be written in such a way that their meanings are clear and precise. This lex is not. What, for example, is the significance of §II? Can a body be established by legal authority (§I), and somehow not be recognized by that same authority? Why is §III not exhaustive? The phrase "such names as ..." suggests that others are possible. §§III and V should be combined, as should §§VII and XI, since they cover identical topics. §VI is the most egregious of them all. What does "most favored" mean? No doubt Severus has his own interpretation, but what matters is how the magistrates responsible for executing this law interpret it. Does it relate to government contracts, denarii, awards, future legislation? The lex specifies nothing. The puzzling ambiguities in this text go on and on, and we haven't even considered the grammatical errors ...
    2. It effectively divests the state of its imperium: Of all the forms of public authority, imperium—that is, military command—was the greatest, entrusted by the people to only the highest ranking magistrates of the Republic. The lex Flavia, however, would subject our Republic's military, not to the imperium of the curule magistrates, but rather to a provincial guild of actors, the legal independence of which the censor has strongly advocated for elsewhere. The lex Flavia would establish as our nation's military, not a host of Roman legions under the command of our magistrates, but a single, self-governing band of Sarmatian mercenaries contracted by the state. They would be able to conduct their business, amend their bylaws however they see fit, or even disband altogether, all without any accountability to the Senate or People. To entrust the entirety of our national military to a single collegium is highly imprudent, and a gross violation of the mos maiorum.
    3. It is anti-Republican and anti-plebeian: The example of Cassia Longina should make us all suspicious of "titles for life," which the censor has embedded in his bylaws for the Legion ("The group’s Founder, T. Flavius Severus, shall hold the position of Tribunus laticlavius for life." [§II.B]). Furthermore, according to these bylaws (the proposed "normative and legal basis for the Legion of the Republic" [§VIII]), command of the Republic's army would no longer fall to the consuls and praetors, but to a patrician or equestrian appointed by the Senate. Thus the plebs are to be entirely excluded from commanding this proposed Legion! Where are the Tribunes to defend us against such aristocratic pretensions?
    Severus claims that the Legion is for promoting recruitment and the Declaration, but his lex Flavia accomplishes nothing towards these proposed ends. The only thing this lex actually succeeds in doing is to enrich the censor's collegium with special "favor", badges, and state patronage. The idea of a Roman army should certainly not be abandoned, but this lex is absolutely unworthy of the task. Let us not hastily approve the first attempt at such legislation, but rather, now that Severus has initiated this discussion, collaborate towards a better execution of it.
When the time comes to submit your ballot, fellow Quirites, I beg you to vote ANTIQVO for both the lex Furia-Cispia and the lex Flavia!

Valete.
L. LIVIVS ANI. SENECA
V. C. ET INL. PR. VR.MAG. COLL. L.
User avatar
Lucius Livius Seneca
Senator
Senator
Lictor Curiatus
Lictor Curiatus
Praetor Urbanus
Praetor Urbanus
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:10 am
Location: Transborealis Silva

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Tiberia Salvia Alba » Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:07 pm

Здравствуйте добрые граждане Республики. Я прочла речь квестора Сенеки и хотела бы высказаться.
Я согласна с уважаемым Квестором относительно закона о социетас. Я видела как шла дискуссия по этому закону, видела наплевательское отношение к этому закону со стороны авторов.
Я хотела бы высказать о законе Флавиев. Мне кажется, что риторика квестора Сенеки достаточно прямолинейна. Квестор Сенека выразил претензии в трёх пунктах. Я стояла у истоков этого закона, поэтому позволю себе прокомментировать критику. Относительно первого пункта: Мы, в большинстве своём, не знаем английского языка, Северус знает английский лучше всех среди Сарматов, те ошибки на которые указывает Сенека, это следствие трудностей перевода. Указывать на такие недочеты сейчас, это все равно, что насмехаться над тем, что человек не владеет неродным языком. Я не понимаю, почему Сенека, имён возможность, не указал на эти недочеты раньше, когда из можно было исправить? Указывать на них сейчас, это все равно, что попрекать людей незнанием английского языка, когда он для вас не родной. По логике квестора Сенеки, получается, что тот кто не говорит по английски, не должен предлагать законы и вовсе не должен учавствовать в законотворчестве?
Второе. «Банда Сарматов» прозвучало обидно. Во-первых, Республика занимается воссозданием культуры не только Римской Республики, но и принципата и домината. Если принять это во внимание, то доводы Сенеки об империуме становятся несостоятельными. Кроме того, квестор Сенека утрирует, разве Сарматы виноваты в том, что именно мы, Сарматы, придумали этот уникальный закон и это нововведение, которое нас выгодно отличает любых других организаций, разве мы виноваты, что только Сарматия имеет готовое реконструкторское сообщество, разве Сарматия виновата, что нам не все равно и только мы имеем силы и ресурсы, чтобы реализовать. Если какая-то провинция хочет этим заняться, то хорошо, мы не против.
Третье. Положение о том, что руководящие посты должны занимать патриции или плебеи продиктовано двумя соображениями: 1) историческое достоверностью, потому что именно так и было в истории; 2) желанием увеличить приток денег в казну и увеличением реальной активности, путём получения желающими статуса всадника - эквита. В этом и был смысл. Считать это недостатком этого закона, это все равно, что спорить с Декларацией Риской Республики, которая говорит нам о том, что мы должны следовать исторической достоверности, где это возможно.
Если кому-то не нравится этот закон, хорошо, мы смиримся с этим, но даже Его критик - Сенека, признает уникальный характер и значимость той идеи, которая заложена в этот закон. Этот закон это детище Сарматии, у нас есть ещё много уникальных идей, которые способны сделать Римскую Республику действительно уникальной организацией, а не «очередным воплощением Нова Ромы или РПР», но если нашей Республике не нужны светлые мысли Сарматов, то мы можем предложить свои идеи, услуги и свой потенциал другой организации.
Я прошу всех голосовать за lex flavia uti rogas
User avatar
Tiberia Salvia Alba
Praetor Peregrinus
Praetor Peregrinus
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:01 pm
Location: Sarmatia Magna

Re: COMITIA TRIBUTA SESSION V - IN SESSION (19 NOV - 04 DEC)

Postby Lucius Livius Seneca » Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:09 am

L. Livius Ani. Seneca quaest. cons. Salviae Albae quaest. prov. omnibusque Quiritibus s.p.d.

I offer the following responses to the objections of my quaestorial colleague:

  1. I am aware that there is a language barrier for our Sarmatian citizens. Evidently, from Salvia's comments, they are as well. I do not understand, therefore, why a native English speaker was not approached to review this text before it was brought to the Senate. Contrary to Salvia Alba's accusation that my criticisms come hypocritically late, I did inform Severus of the difficulties with this text on the floor of the Senate, and attempted to offer an alternative or at least sue for more time, but was promptly ignored by him.
  2. I applaud and routinely marvel at the successes of the Sarmatian province, and certainly wish to capitalize on those successes for the sake of the entire Republic. But Salvia Alba asks, "Is it our fault that only Sarmatia has a ready-made reenactment community? ... If some other province wants to do this, that's fine, we don't mind." The problem is that this lex will grant the Sarmatian Legio XI an explicit monopoly on our military culture, thereby discouraging any other provincial efforts.
  3. "Historical certainty" is an ambiguous justification. As Salvia herself asks of me, to which historical period are were referring? During the Empire the legati were appointed from the senatorii (typically the praetorii), but both the historical Senate and our own admits plebeians. On what historical basis are these antiquated patrician privileges being advanced? The Regal period? If so, will Sarmatia have a king to propose to us next?
The current lex Flavia is a first draft which should have seen several revisions before being brought to the Senate, and there is no urgent reason to rush its adoption. As Caesar Augustus famously quipped, "Festina lente." I am, frankly, stunned by the extortionist threat with which the provincial quaestor concludes her objections: "If our Republic does not need Sarmatian insights, then we can offer our ideas, services, and potential to another organization," as though their loyalty depended upon our uncritical deference. This attitude is childish at best, and treasonous at worst.

Vale et valete.
L. LIVIVS ANI. SENECA
V. C. ET INL. PR. VR.MAG. COLL. L.
User avatar
Lucius Livius Seneca
Senator
Senator
Lictor Curiatus
Lictor Curiatus
Praetor Urbanus
Praetor Urbanus
 
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:10 am
Location: Transborealis Silva

PreviousNext

Return to Main Forum

cron