by Aldus Marius on Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:01 pm
Salvete, amici Romani,
My story is very public, and becoming more so; I've posted significant bits of it here in several places, and Nova Roma has since acquired the maturity and perspective to ask me to write it up for their Wiki. My Pages there are under Annales-->Cat:Nova Roma History-->Cat:Rixa Fimbriana (Nova Roma); or you can search the site directly for "The Fimbria Controversies". It's not done by a long shot, and it'll be a while before I can resume, but there's enough in there to figure out part of what got me so upset.
Here, I'll just go into the major thematic and cultural features and differences, to the extent that I can speak on them accurately after six years' absence and ten months' reacquaintance.
The Societas Via Romana was conceived as an educational institution. Nova Roma aspires to become a sovereign Roman nation: the Roman Republic Reborn, the ultimate re-creation and revival of ancient Roman civilisation, law and lifeways. In particular, it exists to re-establish the public (State) religion; for this reason alone it needs at least enough land, and enough hold over it, to serve as a center for worship of the Roman Gods. For a state religion, one needs a state. For public worship, one needs public institutions. Thus the quest for sovereignty and recognition.
This aspect has been de-emphasised (officially) quite a bit in recent years; but it's still in their mission statement, still in their "corporate consciousness", and it's still humming in the background of almost everything else they do. Their prides, their griefs, their worries, their hangups stem chiefly from the deep need to be taken Seriously. This basic insecurity has not diminished appreciably over the years. It explains a lot of other things about the group, and why things over there flare up the way they so often do.
Given the difference in purpose, there is also a difference in style or approach--one great enough to make NR stick out like a lone cactus in a pine forest to the rest of the Roman world. Simply put, Nova Roma is insular, almost to the point of isolationism. You will find no links on their site to other Roman groups, unless they are spinoffs of or allied with Nova Roma itself, or were founded by Nova Romans. (That's how we got on there.)
They tend to want to sequester their members. I'm on their newbie List and already had one good scare: the Provincial governor of California made a point of the undesireability of recruiting probati (new Cives) from other groups if there are still former Nova Romans to be coaxed back into the fold, lest any outside influence cause significant deviation from, and undue stress upon, Nova Roman organisational culture. (I'm hoping I just massively misunderstood what he said, but that's what he said...mi Valeri, could you go have a look at [newroman], Message #2496, and tell us what you think?) Maybe that was just the one magistrate, but I got the impression NR was worried about people being "off-message"--even if the message is good, word-of-mouth advertising.
The flip side of being isolationist is the delusion of self-sufficiency. I have to call it that, there's no gentler term that would be accurate. For most of its existence, Nova Roma didn't seem to think it needed the rest of the historical-reconstructionist movement, Roman-era or otherwise. It is still not especially receptive to ideas from other groups, no matter how much longer those groups have been in existence or how much more effectively they've been conveying Rome to the public. And I have been told in all seriousness, by good people whom I respect, that the NR Wiki will one day be the premier source of information about all aspects of the life and history of the Roman Republic. I look at the "Recent Changes" list; note the disparity between the plenitude of articles about internal affairs and the paucity of those about almost anything else; and emit a long, shuddering sigh. A noble aim, to be sure; but starting from so far behind...? Who's going to write those articles...and hasn't ancient Rome been covered much better, for much longer, in many other places on the Web?
To the truly bold and enterprising among you, all this must sound like an opportunity. I believe it is. I think, if enough good people go in, stay in, and rise to positions of respect and influence without losing their energy or their ideas, Nova Roma will continue to improve from the inside. But I will not gloss over the difficulty of the task. NR has proven highly-resistant to such change. It is taking place--slowly, modestly, by increments. But it has taken some really hard knocks and the combined efforts of every reform-minded individual and alliance over the last decade to achieve even that. Too many good people have burned themselves out in that Place. She's a heartbreaker, that new Republic. To me, it's a wonder that NR has survived itself.
Let me note that there are now plenty of other things to do in NR besides politics. The emphasis and atmosphere are still highly political; but a Civis can acquire dignitas through activity in various sodalitates, through the Academia Thules, through reenactments and other live gatherings. Working on the Wiki will get you positive vibes (I'm gettin' 'em!). Their few but undaunted Latinists are always looking for backup. And you may find activity at the Provincial level to be more satisfying, because it's not as much of a worm-wrestle as involvement with the central workings of the organisation, and it's more directly beneficial to fellow Romans-in-Spirit. Nova Roma *is* doing more outreach now, though I'm not sure it quite knows what to do with the results! >({|;-)
I must say I'm pleased to see this thread. Early on, when the Board was first launched, I'd get PMed by newbies every time someone mentioned Nova Roma, because there was no central place to share our experiences from there. I asked about starting a topic called "Nova Roma Survivors' Network"; but this was not received well because it was feared it would degenerate into one long rant, even with me moderating. (I was a just-plain-Sodalis then.) The consensus was that we simply had better things to talk about, and other things to do. But I think our own identity and "organisational culture" are strong enough now that we, like NR, can look realistically at that group and learn from it, without worrying that it's going to swallow us up.
In amicitia et fide,
Aldus Marius Peregrinus.