User:Harthacanute/Romanization


 * Romanization may also refer to linguistics; see Romanization.

Romanization is a term used to denote the changes that occured in societies and cultures that came under the rule of the Roman Empire. Traditional studies of Romanization focussed on "natives" adopting the culture of the "Romans". Work over the course of the twentieth century challenged this view, and today the debate over the concept is as vigorous as ever.

Literary sources
Almost all of the literary evidence for Romanization comes from Roman writers, and so we should be aware that nearly all textual references are likely to be a Roman perception of a province, either from first hand knowledge and observation or, more often, based on secondary evidence.

There can be no doubt, however, that the Agricola is a highly complex piece. Tacitus wrote the Agricola because he believed that Agricola had not been honoured enough by the emperor Domitian, whom Tacitus thought a bad emperor. Britain was regarded by those in Rome as being at the edge of the world, lying in the mysterious ocean, and it formed the perfect setting for Agricola, who Tacitus wished to portray as a good governor, acting in a far-flung land with true Roman virtue. Britain becomes almost a backdrop for Tacitus to use for his own literary and political purposes, and we should thus use it with extreme caution.

Archaeology
Much survives from the Romans in Britain to show us as evidence of thir passage and their influence on our culture, towns such as York(Eboracum) and ruins of forts and Roman buildings.

Art
Art survives from the Roman provinces in the form of sculpture, mosaics and frescoes.

Religion
WHY CANT U JUST TELL ME WHAT RELIGION HE WAS

Language
Agricola(first governor of Britain) set up schools, and taught the sons of British chiefs how to speak Latin. Our language today has many words that derive from the Latin language.

The nativist approach
As a backlash against the traditional approach, the "nativist" approach argued that "native" culture continued under a Roman "occupation". As Richard Reece has argued in the case of Britain, the Roman system and its collaborating elites formed a cultural veneer, which because of the wealth held by the upper class made this more visible archaeologically, and that beneath this veneer things carried on much as they always had done. When the imperial system collapsed this veneer was removed, revealing a society relatively untouched by "Roman" culture.

Much of the nativist approach also relies on the idea that culture is a two way exchange of ideas. So while "Roman" culture was transmitted to the provinces, "provincial" culture was also transmitted back to Rome.

Post-colonial interpretations
The most recent development in Romanization studies can be broadly termed post-colonial. This interpretation rejects the idea that we can identify homogenous "Roman" and "provincial" culture.

As Jane Webster has argued, drinking Coca-Cola does not mean that one considers oneself an American. Similarly, though one may have spoken some Latin, or worshipped a god worshipped elsewhere in the empire, does not mean that one had the same understanding of 'being Roman' as those living in Rome. In any case, the concept of being Roman changed in both geographical and chronological contexts. Greg Woolf has argued that 'becoming Roman' meant negotiating with an ideal.