Roman people
Roman religion | |
---|---|
Related ethnic groups | |
Ancient Italic peoples, ancient Mediterranean peoples, modern Romance peoples and modern Greeks |
The Roman people (
Citizenship grants, demographic growth, and settler and military colonies rapidly increased the number of Roman citizens. The increase achieved its peak with Emperor
A particularly disliked group of non-Romans within the empire were the Jews.[30] The majority of the Roman populace detested Jews and Judaism, though views were more varied among the Roman elite.[30] Although many, such as Tacitus, were also hostile to the Jews,[31] others, such as Cicero, were merely unsympathetically indifferent[32] and some did not consider the Jews to be barbarians at all.[30] The Roman state was not wholly opposed to the Jews, since there was a sizeable Jewish population in Rome itself, as well as at least thirteen synagogues in the city.[33] Roman antisemitism, which led to several wars, persecutions, and massacres in Judea, was not rooted in racial prejudice, but rather in the perception that the Jews, uniquely among conquered peoples, refused to integrate into the Roman world.[30] The Jews adhered to their own set of rules, restrictions and obligations, which were typically either disliked or misunderstood by the Romans, and they remained faithful to their own religion.[34] The exclusivist religious practices of the Jews, and their opposition to abandoning their own customs in favour of those of Rome,[30] even after being conquered and repeatedly suppressed,[34] evoked the suspicion of the Romans.[30]
Antiquity
Classical antiquity
Founding myths and Romans of the republic
The founding of Rome, and the history of the city and its people throughout its first few centuries, is steeped in myth and uncertainty. The traditional date for Rome's foundation, 753 BC, and the traditional date for the foundation of the Roman Republic, 509 BC, though commonly used even in modern historiography, are uncertain and mythical.[35][c] The myths surrounding Rome's foundation combined, if not confused, several different stories, going from the origins of the Latin people under a king by the name Latinus, to Evander of Pallantium, who was said to have brought Greek culture to Italy, and a myth of Trojan origin through the heroic figure Aeneas. The actual mythical founder of the city itself, Romulus, only appears many generations into the complex web of foundation myths. Interpretations of these myths varied among authors in Antiquity,[d] but most agreed that their civilisation had been founded by a mixture of migrants and fugitives. These origin narratives would favour the later extensive integrations of foreigners into the Roman world.[40]
The origins of the people that became the first Romans are clearer. As in neighbouring city-states, the early Romans were composed mainly of Latin-speaking Italic people,[41][42] known as the Latins. The Latins were a people with a marked Mediterranean character, related to other neighbouring Italic peoples such as the Falisci.[43] The early Romans were part of the Latin homeland, known as Latium, and were Latins themselves. By the time of the 6th century, the inhabitants of Rome had conquered and destroyed all the other Latin settlements and communities such as Antemnae and Collatia and defeated the hegemony of the settlement of Alba Longa, which had previously united the Latin people under its leadership, a position that now belonged to Rome.[44]
From the middle of the 4th century onwards, Rome won a series of victories which saw them rise to rule all of Italy south of the
Romans of the early empire
In the early Roman Empire, the population was composed of several groups of distinct legal standing, including the Roman citizens themselves (cives romani), the provincials (provinciales), foreigners (peregrini) and free non-citizens such as freedmen (freed slaves) and slaves. Roman citizens were subject to the Roman legal system while provincials were subject to whatever laws and legal systems had been in place in their area at the time it was annexed by the Romans. Over time, Roman citizenship was gradually extended more and more and there was a regular "siphoning" of people from less privileged legal groups to more privileged groups, increasing the total percentage of subjects recognised as Romans though the incorporation of the provinciales and peregrini.[50] The capability of the Roman Empire to integrate foreign peoples was one of the key elements that ensured its success. In antiquity, it was significantly easier as a foreigner to become a Roman than it was to become a member or citizen of any other contemporary state. This aspect of the Roman state was seen as important even by some of the emperors.[51] For instance, Emperor Claudius (r. 41–54) pointed it out when questioned by the senate on admitting Gauls to join the senate:[51]
What else proved fatal to Lacedaemon or Athens, in spite of their power in arms, but their policy of holding the conquered aloof as alien-born? But the sagacity of our own founder Romulus was such that several times he fought and naturalized a people in the course of the same day![51]
From the
In most cases, it is not clear to what extent the majority of the new Roman citizens regarded themselves as being Roman, or to what extent they were regarded as such by others.[7] For some provincials under Roman rule, the only experience with "Romans" prior to themselves being granted citizenship was through Rome's at times coercive tax-collection system or its army, aspects which were not assimilative in terms of forming an empire-spanning collective identity.[56] Caracalla's grant marked a radical change in imperial policy towards the provincials.[57] It is possible that decades, and in many cases centuries, of Romanization through Rome's cultural influence had already begun the evolution of a "national" Roman identity before 212 and that the grant only made the ongoing process legal,[58] but the grant might also have served as the important prerequisite for a later nearly all-encompassing collective Roman identity. According to the British jurist Tony Honoré, the grant "gave many millions, perhaps a majority of the empire's inhabitants […] a new consciousness of being Roman".[57] It is likely that local identities survived after Caracalla's grant and remained prominent throughout the empire, but that self-identification as Roman provided a larger sense of common identity and became important when dealing with and distinguishing oneself from non-Romans, such as barbarian settlers and invaders.[8]
In many cases, ancient Romans associated the same things with their identity as historians do today: the rich ancient Latin literature, the impressive Roman architecture, the common marble statues, the variety of cult sites, the Roman infrastructure and legal tradition, as well as the almost corporate identity of the
Late antiquity
Once the very core of ancient Romanness, the city of Rome gradually lost its exceptional status within the empire in late antiquity.[61] By the end of the third century, the city's importance was almost entirely ideological, and several emperors and usurpers had begun reigning from other cities closer to the imperial frontier.[62] Rome's loss of status was also reflected in the perceptions of the city by the Roman populace. In the writings of the 4th-century Greek-speaking Roman soldier and author Ammianus Marcellinus, Rome is described almost like a foreign city, with disparaging comments on its corruption and impurity.[61] Few Romans in late antiquity embodied all aspects of traditional Romanness. Many of them would have come from remote or less prestigious provinces and practiced religions and cults unheard of in Rome itself. Many of them would also have spoken 'barbarian languages' or Greek instead of Latin.[63] Few inscriptions from late antiquity explicitly identify individuals as 'Roman citizens' or 'Romans'. Before the Antonine Constitution, being a Roman had been a mark of distinction and often stressed, but after the 3rd century Roman status went without saying. This silence does not mean that Romanness no longer mattered in the late Roman Empire, but rather that it had become less distinctive than other more specific marks of identity (such as local identities) and only needed to be stressed or highlighted if a person had recently become a Roman, or if the Roman status of a person was in doubt.[64] The prevalent view of the Romans themselves was that the populus Romanus, or Roman people, were a "people by constitution", as opposed to the barbarian peoples who were gentes, "peoples by descent" (i. e. ethnicities).[65]
Given that Romanness had become near-universal within the empire, local identities became more and more prominent.
The Roman army underwent considerable changes in the 4th century, experiencing what some have called 'barbarisation',
Religion had always been an important marker of Romanness. As Christianity gradually became the dominant religion in the Roman Empire through late antiquity, and eventually became the only legal faith, the Christianised Roman aristocracy had to redefine their Roman identity in Christian terms. The rise of Christianity did not go unnoticed or unchallenged by the conservative elements of the pagan Roman elite, who became aware that power was slipping from their hands. Many of them, pressured by the increasingly anti-pagan and militant Christians, turned to emphasising that they were the only 'true Romans' as they preserved the traditional Roman religion and literary culture.
As the Roman Empire lost, or ceded control of, territories to various barbarian rulers, the status of the Roman citizens in those provinces sometimes came into question. People born as Roman citizens in regions that then came under barbarian control could be subjected to the same prejudice as barbarians were.[82][j] Over the course of the Roman Empire, men from nearly all of its provinces had come to rule as emperors. As such, Roman identity remained political, rather than ethnic, and open to people of various origins. This nature of Roman identity ensured that there was never a strong consolidation of a 'core identity' of Romans in Italy, but also likely contributed to the long-term endurance and success of the Roman state. The fall of the Western Roman Empire coincided with the first time the Romans actively excluded an influential foreign group within the empire, the barbarian and barbarian-descended generals of the 5th century, from Roman identity and access to the Roman imperial throne.[83]
Later history
The Roman Empire's expansion facilitated the spread of Roman identity over a large stretch of territories that had never before had a common identity and never would again. The effects of Roman rule on the personal identities of the empire's subjects was considerable and the resulting Roman identity outlasted actual imperial control by several centuries.[84]
Western Europe
Early endurance of Roman identity
From the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the late 5th century to the wars of Emperor
Culturally and legally, Roman identity remained prominent in the west for centuries,[91] still providing a sense of unity throughout the Mediterranean.[81] Italy's Ostrogothic Kingdom preserved the Roman Senate, which often dominated politics in Rome,[92] illustrating the survival of and continued respect for Roman institutions and identity.[93] The barbarian kings continued to use Roman law throughout the early Middle Ages,[91] often issuing their own law collections. In 6th-century law collections issued by the Visigoths in Spain and the Franks in Gaul, it is clear that there were still large populations identifying as Romans in these regions given that the law collections distinguish between barbarians who live by their own laws and Romans who live by Roman law.[91] Even after Italy was conquered by the Lombards in the late 6th century, the continued administration and urbanisation of northern Italy attest to a continued survival of Roman institutions and values.[93] It was still possible for non-citizens (such as barbarians) in the west to become Roman citizens well into the 7th and 8th centuries; several surviving Visigothic and Frankish documents explain the benefits of becoming a Roman citizen and there are records of rulers and nobles freeing slaves and making them into citizens.[94] Despite this, Roman identity was in a steep decline by the 7th and 8th centuries.[k]
Disappearances of Roman identity
The great turning point in the history of the latter-day Romans of the west was the wars of Justinian I (533–555), aimed at reconquering the lost provinces of the Western Roman Empire.[95] During Justinian's early reign, eastern authors re-wrote 5th-century history to portray the west as "lost" to barbarian invasions, rather than attempting to further integrate the barbarian rulers into the Roman world.[90] By the end of the Justinianic wars, imperial control had returned to northern Africa and Italy, but the wars being founded on the idea that anything outside of the eastern empire's direct control was no longer part of the Roman Empire meant that there could no longer be any doubt that the lands beyond the imperial frontier were no longer Roman and instead remained "lost to barbarians". As a result, Roman identity in the still barbarian-ruled regions (i.e. Gaul, Spain and Britain) declined dramatically.[95] During the reconquest of Italy, the Roman Senate disappeared and most of its members moved to Constantinople. Though the senate achieved a certain legacy in the west,[l] the end of the institution removed a group that had always set the standard of what Romanness was supposed to mean.[96] The war in Italy also divided the Roman elite there between those who enjoyed barbarian rule and those who supported the empire and later withdrew to imperial territory, meaning that Roman identity ceased to provide a sense of social and political cohesion.[96]
The division of Western Europe into multiple different kingdoms accelerated the disappearance of Roman identity, as the previously unifying identity was replaced by local identities based on the region one was from. The fading connectivitiy also meant that while largely Roman law and culture continued on, the language became increasingly fragmented and split, Latin gradually developing into what would become the modern Romance languages.[13][97] Where they had once been the majority of the population, the Romans of Gaul and Hispania gradually and quietly faded away as their descendants adopted other names and identities.[97] In Sub-Roman Britain, the people of the large urban centers clinged to Roman identity, but rural populations integrated and assimilated with Germanic colonisers (the Jutes, Angles and Saxons). Once the large cities declined, Roman identity faded away in Britain as well.[98]
The adoption of local identities in Gaul and Hispania was made more attractive in that they were not binary opposed to the identity of the barbarian rulers in the same way that 'Roman' was; for instance, one could not be both Roman and Frankish, but it was possible to, for instance, be both Arvernian (i.e. from
The disappearance of the Romans is reflected in the barbarian law collections. In the Salic law of Clovis I (from around 500), the Romans and the Franks are the two major parallel populations of the kingdom and both have well-defined legal statuses. A century later in the Lex Ripuaria, the Romans are just one of many smaller semi-free populations, restricted in their legal capacity, with many of their former advantages now associated with Frankish identity. Such legal arrangements would have been unthinkable under the Roman Empire and under the early decades of barbarian rule.[102][99] By Charlemagne's imperial coronation in 800, Roman identity largely disappeared in Western Europe and fell to low social status.[103][104][m] The situation was somewhat paradoxical: living Romans, in Rome and elsewhere, had a poor reputation, with records of anti-Roman attacks and the use of 'Roman' as an insult, but the name of Rome was also used a source of great and unfailing political power and prestige, employed by many aristocratic families (sometimes proudly proclaiming invented Roman origins) and rulers throughout history.[103] Through suppressing Roman identity in the lands they ruled and discounting the remaining empire in the east as "Greek", the Frankish state hoped to avoid the possibility of the Roman people proclaiming a Roman emperor in the same way that the Franks proclaimed a Frankish king.[106]
Reversion to Rome proper
The population of the city of Rome continued to identify, and be identified, as Romans by westerners. Although Rome's history was not forgotten, the city's importance in the Middle Ages primarily stemmed from it being the seat of the pope,[n] a view shared by both westerners and the eastern empire.[107][108] During the centuries following Justinian's reconquest, when the city was still under imperial control, the population was not specially administered and did not have any political participation in wider imperial affairs.[108] When clashing with the emperors, the popes sometimes employed the fact that they had the backing of the populus Romanus ("people of Rome") as a legitimising factor, meaning that the city still endured some ideological importance in terms of Romanness.[109] Western European authors and intellectuals increasingly associated Romanness only with the city itself.[107][o] By the second half of the 8th century, westerners almost exclusively used the term to refer to the population of the city.[108] When the temporal power of the papacy was established through the foundation of the Papal States in the 8th century, the popes used the fact that they were accompanied and supported by the populus Romanus as something that legitimised their sovereignty.[108]
The Roman populace considered neither the eastern empire nor Charlemagne's new "Holy Roman Empire" to be properly Roman.[110] Though the continuity from Rome to Constantinople was accepted in the west,[111] surviving sources point to the easterners being seen as Greeks who had abandoned Rome and Roman identity.[110] The Carolingian kings on the other hand were seen as having more to do with the Lombard kings of Italy than the ancient Roman emperors.[111] The medieval Romans also often equated the Franks with the ancient Gauls, and viewed them as aggressive, insolent and vain.[112] Despite this, the Holy Roman emperors were recognised by the citizens of Rome as true Roman emperors,[p] albeit only because of their support and coronation by the popes.[110]
The Franks and other westerners did not view the population of Rome favourably either. Foreign sources are generally hostile, ascribing traits such as unrest and deceit to the Romans and describing them as "as proud as they are helpless". Anti-Roman sentiment lasted throughout the Middle Ages.[q] The Romans partly owed their bad reputation to sometimes trying to take an independent position towards the popes of the Holy Roman emperors. Given that these rulers were seen as having universal power, the Romans were considered intruders in affairs that exceeded their competence.[113]
North Africa
Unlike the other kingdoms, the
The Vandalic promotion of independent African symbols had a profound effect on the formerly Roman populace of their kingdom.[118] By the time the soldiers of the eastern empire landed in Africa during Justinian's Vandalic War, the Romance people of North Africa had ceased to identify as Romans, instead preferring either Libyans (Libicus) or Punic people (Punicus). Contemporary eastern authors also described them as Libyans (Λίβυες).[118] During the Vandal Kingdom's brief existence, the Vandal ruling class had culturally and ethnically merged with the Romano-Africans. By the time the kingdom fell, the only real cultural differences between the "Libyans" and "Vandals" were that Vandals adhered to Arian Christianity and were permitted to serve in the army.[119] After North Africa was reincorporated into the empire, the eastern Roman government deported the Vandals from the region, which shortly thereafter led to disappearance of the Vandals as a distinct group. The only individuals recorded to have been deported were soldiers; given that the wives and children of the "Vandals" thus remained in North Africa, the name at this stage appears to mainly have denoted the soldier class.[120]
Despite North Africa's reincorporation into the empire, the distinction between "Libyans" and "Romans" (i.e. the inhabitants of the eastern empire) was maintained by both groups. Per the writings of the 6th-century eastern historian Procopius, the Libyans were descended from Romans, ruled by the Romans, and served in the Roman army, but their Romanness had diverged too much from that of the populace of the empire as a result of the century of Vandal rule. Imperial policy reflected the view that the North Africans were no longer Romans. Whereas governors in the eastern provinces were often native to their respective provinces, the military and administrative staff in North Africa was almost entirely constituted by easterners.[121] The imperial government distrusting the locals was hardly surprising given that imperial troops had been harassed by local (formerly Roman) peasants during the Vandalic War, supportive of the Vandal regime, and that there had been several rebels thereafter, such as Guntarith and Stotzas, who sought to restore an independent kingdom.[122] The distinction between the Romans and the Romance people of North Africa is also reflected in foreign sources, and the two populations appear to not yet have been reconciled by the time the African provinces fell during the Muslim conquest of the Maghreb and Roman rule was terminated.[121][s]
Eastern Mediterranean
Survival of the Roman Empire in the east
Eastern Mediterranean populations, which remained under Eastern Roman (or "Byzantine") control after the 5th century, retained "Roman" as their predominant identity;[123] the majority of the population saw themselves as being Roman beyond any doubt and their emperor as ruling from the cultural and religious center of the Roman Empire: Constantinople, the New Rome.[124] In the centuries when the Byzantine Empire was still a vast Mediterranean-spanning state, Roman identity was more strong in the imperial heartlands than on the peripheries,[t] though it was also strongly embraced in the peripheral regions in times of uncertainty.[123][u] As in earlier centuries, the Romans of the early Byzantine Empire were considered a people united by being subjects of the Roman state, rather than a people united through sharing ethnic descent (i.e. gens like those ascribed to different barbarian groups).[65][v] The term extended to all Christian citizens of the empire, in a general sense referring to those who followed Chalcedonian Christianity and were loyal to the emperor.[126]
In Byzantine writings up until at least the 12th century, the idea of the Roman "homeland" consistently referred not to Greece or Italy, but to the entire old Roman world.[127][w] Despite this, the Romans of Byzantium were also aware that their present empire was no longer as powerful as it once had been, and that centuries of warfare and strife had left the Roman Empire reduced in territory and somewhat humbled.[129]
Given that the rulers of the Byzantine Empire were predominantly Hellenic, and the percentage of the population that was Hellenic became greater as the empire's borders were increasingly reduced, Western Europeans, from as early as the 6th century onwards,[x] often referred to it as a Greek empire, inhabited by Greeks. To the early Byzantines themselves, up until the 11th century or so, terms such as "Hellenes" were seen as offensive, as it downplayed their Roman nature and furthermore associated them with the ancient Pagan Greeks rather than the more recent Christian Romans.[131] The westerners were not unaware of Byzantium's Romanness; when not wishing to distance themselves from the eastern empire, the term Romani was frequently used for soldiers and subjects of the eastern emperors.[106] From the 6th to 8th century, western authors also sometimes employed terms such as res publica or sancta res publica for the Byzantine Empire, still identifying it with the old Roman Republic. Such references ceased as Byzantine control of Italy and Rome itself crumbled and the Papacy began to use the term for their own, much more regional, domain and sphere of influence.[109]
After the Muslim conquests
As the Byzantine Empire lost its territories in Egypt, the Levant and Italy, the Christians who lived in those regions ceased to be recognised by the Byzantine government as Romans,[129] much in the same vein as had happened with the North Africans under Vandal rule.[118] The decrease in the diversity of peoples recognised as being Roman meant that the term Roman increasingly came to be applied only to the now dominant Hellenic population of the remaining territories, rather than to all imperial citizens.[129] As the Hellenic populace were united by following Orthodox Christianity, spoke the same Greek language, and believed that they shared a common ethnic origin,[132] "Roman" (Rhōmaîoi in Greek)[123] thus gradually transformed into an ethnic identity.[133] By the late 7th century, Greek, rather than Latin, had begun being referred to in the east as the rhomaisti (Roman way of speaking).[129] In chronicles written in the 10th century, the Rhōmaîoi begin to appear as just one of the ethnicities in the empire (alongside, for instance, Armenians) and by the late 11th century, there are references in historical writings to people as being "Rhōmaîos by birth", signalling the completion of the transformation of "Roman" into an ethnic description. At this point, "Roman" also began being used for Greek populations outside of the imperial borders, such as to the Greek-speaking Christians under Seljuk rule in Anatolia, who were referred to as Rhōmaîoi despite actively resisting attempts at re-integration by the Byzantine emperors.[134] Only a handful of late sources retain the old view of a Roman being a citizen of the Roman world.[133][y]
The capture of Constantinople by the non-Roman Latin crusaders of the Fourth Crusade in 1204 ended the unbroken Roman continuity from Rome to Constantinople. In order to legitimise themselve as Romans in the decades when they no longer controlled Constantinople, the Byzantine elite began to look to other markers of what Romans were. The elites of the Empire of Nicaea, the Byzantine government-in-exile, chiefly looked to Greek cultural heritage and Orthodox Christianity, connecting the contemporary Romans to the ancient Greeks. This contributed to Romanness becoming even more increasingly associated with people who were ethno-culturally Hellenic. Under the Nicene emperors John III (r. 1222–1254) and Theodore II (r. 1254–1258), these ideas were taken further than ever before as they explicitly stated that the present Rhōmaîoi were Hellenes, descendants of the Ancient Greeks.[135] Though they saw themselves as Hellenic, the Nicene emperors also maintained that they were the only true Roman emperors. "Roman" and "Hellenic" were not viewed as opposing terms, but building blocks of the same double-identity.[136] During the rule of the Palaiologos dynasty, from the recapture of Constantinople in 1261 to the fall of the empire in 1453, Hellene lost ground as a self-identity, with few known uses of the term, and Rhōmaîoi once again became the dominant term used for self-description.[137] Some Byzantine authors went as far as to return to using "Hellenic" and "Greek" solely as terms for the ancient pagan Greeks.[138][z]
After the fall of Constantinople
Rhōmaîoi survived the fall of the Byzantine Empire as the primary self-designation of the Christian Greek inhabitants of the new Turkish Ottoman Empire. The popular historical memory of these Romans was not occupied with the glorious past of the Roman Empire of old or the Hellenism in the Byzantine Empire, but focused on legends of the fall and the loss of their Christian homeland and Constantinople. One such narrative was the myth that the last emperor, Constantine XI Palaiologos would one day return from the dead to reconquer the city,[139] a myth that endured in Greek folklore up until the time of the Greek War of Independence (1821–1829) and beyond.[140]
In the
As applied to the Greeks, the self-identity as Romans endured longer, and for a long time there was widespread hope that the Romans would be liberated and that their empire would be restored.[146][aa] By the time of the Greek War of Independence, the dominant self-identity of the Greeks was still Rhōmaîoi or Romioi.[147]
Modern identity
The citizens of the city of Rome, though identifying nationally and ethnically as
Roman self-identification among Greeks only began losing ground with the Greek War of Independence, when multiple factors saw the name 'Hellene' rise to replace it. Among these factors were that names such as "Hellene", "Hellas" and "Greece" were already in use for the country and its people by the other nations in Europe, the absence of the old Byzantine government to reinforce Roman identity, and the term Romioi becoming associated with those Greeks still under Ottoman rule rather than those actively fighting for independence. Thus, in the eyes of the independence movement, a Hellene was a brave and rebellious freedom fighter while a Roman was an idle slave under the Ottomans.[152][153] The new Hellenic national identity was heavily focused on the cultural heritage of ancient Greece rather than medieval Byzantium, though adherence to Orthodox Christianity remained an important aspect of Greek identity.[154] An identity re-oriented towards ancient Greece also worked in Greece's favour internationally. In Western Europe, the Greek War of Independence saw large-scale support owing to philhellenism, a sense of "civilisational debt" to the world of classical antiquity, rather than any actual interest in the modern country. Despite the modern Greeks bearing more resemblance to the medieval Byzantines than the Greeks of the ancient world, public interest in the revolt elsewhere in Europe hinged almost entirely on sentimental and intellectual attachments to a romanticised version of ancient Greece. Comparable uprisings against the Ottomans by other peoples in the Balkans, such as the First Serbian Uprising (1804–1814), had been almost entirely ignored in Western Europe.[155]
Many Greeks, particularly those outside the then newly founded Greek state, continued to refer to themselves as Romioi well into the 20th century.
The vast majority of the
In some regions, the Germanic word for the Romans (also used for western neighbours in general),
See also
- List of ancient Italic peoples
- Pan-Latinism
- Romance-speaking world
Notes
- ^ a b The official languages of the Roman Empire were Latin and Greek.[1]
- ^ Though not an ethnicity in the sense of sharing the same genetic descent, the Romans could, per Diemen (2021) and others, be seen as an ethnicity in the sense of "a social identity (based on a contrast vis‐à‐vis others) characterised by metaphoric or fictive kinship".[3]
- ^ The 753 BC figure for Rome's foundation was first suggested by the antiquarian Titus Pomponius Atticus (c. 110–32 BC), and then adopted by the scholar Marcus Terentius Varro (116–27 BC), coming to be known as the 'Varronian chronology'.[36][35] There were several alternate proposed dates for the foundation of the city and of the republic even in antiquity.[35] The chronology of Atticus and Varro was not universally adopted until a considerable amount of time after it had first been suggested.[35] Dates suggested by other ancient authors range in time from 814 to 729 BC.[37] In the earliest Greek accounts of Roman history, formulated in the 5th century BC, the Greeks believed Rome to predate their own colonies in the western mediterranean, which would place the city's foundation before the 8th century BC. An early date is not impossible given that archaeological evidence in Rome confirms that the site was at least inhabited prior to 753 BC.[38]
- Origo gentis Romanae, leave the contradictions open.[39]
- ^ Though it is well-established in modern historiography, "Caracalla" was a nickname for the emperor, whose actual name was Marcus Aurelius Severus Antoninus.[54]
- ^ The 6th-century Gallo-Roman historian Gregory of Tours in his writings consistently identifies himself as an 'Arvernian' rather than as a Roman. Though Gregory rarely discusses ethnic identities in his writings, with only a handful of references to various barbarian gentes, types of identity that evidently mattered a lot to him were civititas, which city or settlement one was from, and ducatus, a slightly wider stretch of territory (such as the region of Champagne).[67]
- ^ Sometimes the inclusion of barbarian elements in the Roman army became awkward due to the prevailing anti-barbarian stereotypes. In the 4th-century civil war between Theodosius I (r. 379–395) and Magnus Maximus (r. 383–388), the army of Magnus Maximus was composed solely of Roman soldiers whereas the victorious Theodosius bolstered his forces with Gothic soldiers. Given the negative stereotypes, the panegyrist Latinius Pacatus Drepanius (fl. 389–393) described the troops of Maximus as having 'lost' their Romanness due to following the usurper, while emphasising the Roman qualities of the Gothic soldiers (though despite their loyalty, Pacatus never describes them as 'Roman'), describing them as uncharacteristically loyal for barbarians, disciplined and following orders. Though their barbarian nature is repeatedly emphasised, the Roman qualities of the Gothic warriors means that the army of Theodosius, in the view of Pacatus, remained fundamentally Roman. Per Pacatus, the remaining troops of Maximus were pardoned by Theodosius after the defeat of the usurper, and through this became Roman again. For people born within the empire, virtue and following the right Roman leader was thus seen by Pacatus as enough to be Roman, but for the barbarian troops who exhibited the same qualities it was not.[71]
- ^ For instance, a 3rd-century funerary inscription from Pannonia reads Francus ego cives Romanus miles in armis, which translates to "I, a Frank, a Roman citizen, a soldier in arms".[74]
- Flavius Stilicho (c. 359–408), whose father was a Vandal but mother a Roman, regent in the Western Roman Empire during the early reign of Honorius (r. 393–423), was not a matter of debate until after his fall from grace and execution in 408.[75] During his tenure as regent, Stilicho was repeatedly compared to heroes of the ancient Roman Republic, such as Scipio Africanus.[76]
- Attila the Hun, whom Orestes came to serve as a secretary. Though there is no reason to believe that Orestes himself ever doubted his own Romanness, the loss of his native province to the barbarians and his own personal association with Attila led to Orestes becoming the target of the same prejudice against non-Romans as the barbarians were, with records of Orestes being offended at being treated worse at the imperial court than the Hunnic warriors who accompanied him.[82] Despite this, Orestes remained fundamentally Roman in his outlook, and in time even became a general of the empire. In 475, Orestes installed his son, Romulus Augustulus, as the last emperor of the Western Roman Empire.[81]
- ^ A well-documented case of the Romans "disappearing" is northern Gaul in the 6th and 7th centuries. In the 6th century, the personnel of churches in the region was dominated by people with Roman names. For instance, only a handful of non-Roman and non-Biblical names are recorded in the episcopal list of Metz from before the year 600. After 600, the situation is reversed and bishops had predominantly Frankish names. The reason for this change in naming practices might be a change in naming practices in Gaul, that people entering church services no longer adopted Roman names or that the Roman families which had provided the church personnel dropped in status.[95]
- ^ In Gaul, members of the aristocracy were sometimes identified as "senators" from the 5th century to the 7th century and the Carolingian dynasty claimed to be descended from a former Roman senatorial family. In Spain, references to people of "senatorial stock" appear as late as the 7th century and in Lombard Italy, "Senator" became a personal name, with at least two people known to have had the name in the 8th century. The practice of representing themselves as "the Senate" was revived by the aristocracy within the city of Rome in the 8th century, though the institution itself was not revived.[92]
- ^ 8th century sources from Salzburg still reference that there was a social group in the city called the Romani tributales but Romans at this time mostly merged with the wider tributales (tributary peoples) distinction rather than being separate in Frankish documents. Throughout most of former Gaul, the Roman elite which had lingered for centuries merged with the Frankish elite and lost their previous distinct identity. Though "Romans" continued to be a dominant identity in regional politics in southern Gaul for a while, the specific references to some individuals as "Romans" or "descendants of Romans" indicates that their Roman status was perhaps no longer being taken for granted and needed pointing out. The last groups of Romani in the Frankish realm lingered for some time, especially in Salzburg and Raetia, but mostly fade away in the early 9th century.[105]
- ^ For instance, in the 6th century writings of Gregory of Tours, Rome is not mentioned until Saint Peter arrives there, and Gregory appears indifferent to Rome once having been the capital of an empire.[79]
- Archbishop of Ravenna, Marinianus, only because he had originally been born in Rome. This indicates that the term at some point ceased to generally refer to all the Latin-speaking subjects of the Lombard kings and became restricted to the city itself.[107]
- ^ Only in the sense of sharing continuity with the ancient emperors and governing the Roman Empire. The Holy Roman emperors were not seen as "Romans" in any sense.[110]
- ^ As late as the 13th and 14th centuries, the writer Dante Alighieri wrote that the Romans "stand out among all Italians for the ugliness of their manners and their outward appearance".[113]
- ^ By the time of the Vandal Kingdom's fall, the Vandalic language was in sharp decline, if not almost entirely extinct. There are records of bishops from the Vandal Kingdom pretending not to be able to speak Latin to avoid debates with bishops from the eastern empire and the other kingdoms, but such claims were doubted even by their contemporaries.[115]
- ^ The Arab historian Ibn Abd al-Hakam, who wrote of the Muslim conquest of the Maghreb, described North Africa as home to three peoples: the Berbers, the Romans (Rūm) and the Africans (Afāriq).[121]
- ^ For instance, Byzantine individuals from Italy almost never describe themselves as "Roman" and Syriac sources almost always treat the Romans in third person.[123]
- ^ For instance, an inscription on a brick from Sirmium, inscribed during the Avar siege of the city in 580–582, reads "Oh Lord, help the town and halt the Avar and protect the Romanía and the scribe. Amen."[123]
- ^ There are early references to Romans as a gens, for instance the late antiquity works of Priscian and Jordanes, but they are very rare.[125]
- ^ For much of its history, the populace of the Byzantine Empire firmly believed that the western empire, and other territories, would eventually be reconquered. As late as the middle of the 12th-century, the Byzantine princess Anna Komnene wrote that if her father, emperor Alexios I Komnenos (r. 1081–1118), "had not been hindered by unfavourable circumstances, he would have rightfully restored Roman rule over the whole former Roman world, up to the limits of the Atlantic Ocean in the west and India in the east".[128]
- ^ One of the earliest western references to the easterners as "Greeks" comes from Bishop Avitus of Vienne who wrote, in the context of the Frankish king Clovis I's baptism; "Let Greece, to be sure, rejoice in having an orthodox ruler, but she is no longer the only one to deserve such a great gift".[130]
- ^ The 15th century Byzantine historian Doukas, for instance, refers to the Genoese general Giovanni Giustiniani, who assisted the Byzantines at the fall of Constantinople, as a 'general of the Romans'.[133]
- ^ In the writings of Doukas, the Greeks are a foreign people, separated from the present Romans by both time and religious differences. Doukas also uses the terms in an insulting manner for the anti-unionists active near the fall of Constantinople.[138]
- ^ As an example, the chronicler Gaza Paisios Ligaridis wrote in the 17th century that "it is a great comfort to us thrice-miserable Romans to hear that there shall come a resurrection, a deliverance of our Genos". When the Russo-Turkish War of 1768–1774 failed to lead to the restoration of the empire, Kaisarios Dapontes wrote that "the empire of the Romans will never be resurrected" and Athanasios Komninos-Ypsilantis wrote that "if therefore, in the time appointed by the prophecies, the Romans have not been liberated, then it will be very difficult for the resurrection of the Roman empire to take place".[146]
- ^ Peter Charanis, who was born on the island of Lemnos in 1908 and later became a professor of Byzantine history at Rutgers University, recounts that when the island was taken from the Ottomans by Greece in 1912, Greek soldiers were sent to each village and stationed themselves in the public squares. According to Charanis, some of the island children ran to see what Greek soldiers looked like; ‘‘what are you looking at?’’ one of the soldiers asked. ‘‘At Hellenes,’’ the children replied. ‘‘Are you not Hellenes yourselves?’’ the soldier retorted. ‘‘No, we are Romans’’ the children replied.[156]
- Vlachs" is mentioned. It has been argued that "Ramunc" was not the name of the duke, but a collective name that highlighted his ethnicity. Other documents, especially Byzantine or Hungarian ones, also attest the old Romanians as Romans or their descendants.[164]
References
Citations
- ^ Rochette 2012, p. 553.
- ^ Gruen 2014, p. 426.
- ^ a b Diemen 2021, p. 47.
- ^ Darling Buck 1916, p. 51.
- ^ Faniko & Karamuço 2015, p. 3.
- ^ a b Stouraitis 2018, p. 127.
- ^ a b Hope 1997, p. 118.
- ^ a b Milavec 2020, pp. 91–92.
- ^ a b c Pohl 2014, p. 417.
- ^ a b c Revell 2009, p. x.
- ^ a b c Pohl 2018, p. 8.
- ^ Hope 1997, pp. 118–119.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 4.
- ^ a b Arno 2012, p. 12.
- ^ a b c Dench 2010, p. 7.
- ^ Gruen 2013, p. 4.
- ^ Stouraitis 2018, p. 137.
- ^ a b Arno 2012, p. 57.
- ^ Arno 2012, p. viii.
- ^ a b Gruen 2014, p. 5.
- ^ a b Gruen 2014, p. 4.
- ^ a b Dench 2010, p. 8.
- ^ a b Thompson 1993.
- ^ Snowden 1997, pp. 40–41, 50–51.
- ^ a b Rubel 2020, p. 11.
- ^ Śliżewska 2018, p. 34.
- ^ Caló Levi 1952, pp. 27, 31.
- ^ Rubel 2020, p. 4.
- ^ Rubel 2020, p. 9.
- ^ a b c d e f Rubel 2020, p. 10.
- ^ Yavetz 1998, p. 91.
- ^ Yavetz 1998, p. 81.
- ^ Yavetz 1998, p. 96.
- ^ a b Yavetz 1998, p. 105.
- ^ a b c d Sanders 1908, p. 316.
- ^ Forsythe 2005, p. 94.
- ^ Sanders 1908, pp. 322–324.
- ^ Sanders 1908, p. 320.
- ^ Pohl 2014, p. 410.
- ^ Pohl 2014, p. 411.
- ^ Bradley & Glinister 2013, p. 179.
- ^ Dawson & Farquharson 1923, p. 132.
- ^ Dawson & Farquharson 1923, p. 135.
- ^ Dawson & Farquharson 1923, p. 144.
- ^ a b Rich & Shipley 1995, p. 2.
- ^ Rich & Shipley 1995, p. 3.
- ^ a b c Lavan 2016, p. 2.
- ^ Lavan 2016, p. 7.
- ^ Conant 2015, p. 159.
- ^ Mathisen 2015, p. 153.
- ^ a b c Pohl 2018, p. 9.
- ^ Mathisen 2015, p. 154.
- ^ Conant 2015, p. 158.
- ^ a b Lavan 2016, p. 5.
- ^ Lavan 2016, p. 3.
- ^ Stouraitis 2014, p. 184.
- ^ a b Williams 2018, p. 18.
- ^ Stouraitis 2014, p. 185.
- ^ Pohl 2014, pp. 406–407.
- ^ Pohl 2014, pp. 409–410.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, pp. 9–10.
- ^ Omissi 2018, p. 14.
- ^ Pohl 2018, p. [page needed].
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 5.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 7.
- ^ a b Halsall 2018, p. 49.
- ^ a b Halsall 2018, p. 46.
- ^ a b c d Halsall 2018, p. 50.
- ^ Bileta 2016, p. 25.
- ^ Bileta 2016, p. 26.
- ^ Diemen 2021, pp. 46–54.
- ^ Bileta 2016, p. 28.
- ^ Bileta 2016, pp. 29–30.
- ^ Pohl 2018, p. 16.
- ^ Sánchez-Ostiz 2018, p. 313.
- ^ Sánchez-Ostiz 2018, p. 320.
- ^ Hen 2018, pp. 61–62.
- ^ Hen 2018, p. 63.
- ^ a b Hen 2018, p. 64.
- ^ Hen 2018, p. 61.
- ^ a b c Conant 2015, p. 157.
- ^ a b Conant 2015, p. 156.
- ^ Pohl 2014, p. 415.
- ^ Pohl 2018, p. 3.
- ^ Halsall 2018, p. 51.
- ^ Gillett 2002, pp. 118–119.
- ^ Jones 1962, p. 127.
- ^ Jones 1962, p. 126.
- ^ a b Mathisen 2012, pp. 105–107.
- ^ a b c Halsall 2018, p. 52.
- ^ a b c Pohl 2018, p. 14.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, pp. 11–12.
- ^ a b Barnish 1988, p. 151.
- ^ Pohl 2018, pp. 12–13.
- ^ a b c Halsall 2018, p. 53.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 38.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, pp. 15–18, 38–39.
- ^ Sorrill 2012, pp. 35–36.
- ^ a b Halsall 2018, p. 55.
- ^ Buchberger 2015, Conclusion.
- ^ Arce 2018, pp. 373–374.
- ^ Halsall 2018, p. 48.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 39.
- ^ Sarti 2016, pp. 1055–1056.
- ^ Pohl 2018, pp. 15–16, 38–39.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 20.
- ^ a b c Pohl 2018, p. 10.
- ^ a b c d Delogu 2018, p. 157.
- ^ a b Pohl 2018, p. 11.
- ^ a b c d Granier 2018, p. 225.
- ^ a b Granier 2018, pp. 223–225.
- ^ Granier 2018, p. 196.
- ^ a b Granier 2018, pp. 158, 168.
- ^ Conant 2015, p. 164.
- ^ Parker 2018, pp. 18–19.
- ^ Parker 2018, p. 5.
- ^ Parker 2018, pp. 44, 48.
- ^ a b c Parker 2018, pp. 12–14.
- ^ Parker 2018, pp. 7, 10.
- ^ Parker 2018, p. 26.
- ^ a b c Parker 2018, pp. 55–57.
- ^ Parker 2018, p. 56.
- ^ a b c d e Pohl 2018, p. 19.
- ^ Stouraitis 2014, p. 177.
- ^ Pohl 2018, pp. 7–8.
- ^ Pohl 2018, pp. 20, 27.
- ^ Stouraitis 2014, pp. 188–189.
- ^ Stouraitis 2014, p. 188.
- ^ a b c d Stouraitis 2017, p. 74.
- ^ Pohl 2018, p. 25.
- ^ Cameron 2009, p. 7.
- ^ Smarnakis 2015, p. 213.
- ^ a b c Smarnakis 2015, p. 221.
- ^ Stouraitis 2017, p. 80.
- ^ Stouraitis 2017, p. 85.
- ^ Stouraitis 2017, p. 86.
- ^ Kaplanis 2014, p. 92.
- ^ a b Smarnakis 2015, pp. 221–222.
- ^ Stouraitis 2017, p. 88.
- ^ Nicol 1992, pp. 107–108.
- ^ a b Kafadar 2007, p. 11.
- ^ Özbaran 2001, p. 66.
- ^ Özbaran 2001, p. 64.
- ^ Mosca 2010, p. 153.
- ^ Greene 2015, p. 51.
- ^ a b Hatzopoulos 2009, pp. 84–85.
- ^ Makrygiannis 1849, p. 117.
- ^ World Population Review.
- ^ Wilcox 2013.
- ^ Vandiver Nicassio 2009, p. 21.
- ^ Ridley 1976, p. 268.
- ^ Phrantzes 1839, p. 398.
- ^ Korais 1805, p. 37.
- ^ Efstathiadou 2011, p. 191.
- ^ Morrison 2018, p. 39.
- ^ Kaldellis 2007, pp. 42–43.
- ^ Efstathiadou 2011, p. 204.
- ^ Merry 2004, p. 376; Institute for Neohellenic Research 2005, p. 8; Kakavas 2002, p. 29.
- ^ Voutira 2006, p. 384.
- ^ Roudometof 2008, p. 70.
- ^ a b c Billigmeier 1979, p. 450.
- ^ Gess, Lyche & Meisenburg 2012, pp. 173–174.
- ^ Berciu Drăghicescu 2012, p. 788.
- ^ Drugaș 2016, pp. 71–124.
- ^ Light & Dumbrăveanu Andone 1997, pp. 28–43.
- ^ Ružica 2006, pp. 28–30.
- ^ Burlacu 2010, pp. 15–22.
- ^ a b Berciu Drăghicescu 2012, p. 311.
Sources
- Arce, Javier (2018). "Goths and Romans in Visigothic Hispania". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Arno, Claudia I. (2012). How Romans Became "Roman": Creating Identity in an Expanding World (PDF) (Doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan.
- Barnish, S. J. B. (1988). "Transformation and Survival in the Western Senatorial Aristocracy, C. A. D. 400-700". Papers of the British School at Rome. 56: 120–155. S2CID 163910316.
- Berciu Drăghicescu, Adina (2012). Aromâni, meglenoromâni, istroromâni: Aspecte identitare și culturale (in Romanian). Editura Universității din București. p. 788.
- Bileta, Vedran (2016). "The last legions: The "barbarization" of military identity in the Late Roman West". Tabula (14). Hrčak: 22–42. .
- Billigmeier, Robert Henry (1979). A Crisis in Swiss pluralism: The Romansh and their relations with the German- and Italian-Swiss in the perspective of a millennium. Mouton Publishers. ISBN 978-9-0279-7577-5.
- Bradley, Guy; Glinister, Fay (2013). "Italic religion". In Bredholt Christensen, Lisbeth; Hammer, Olav; Warburton, David (eds.). The Handbook of Religions in Ancient Europe. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-315-72897-1.
- Buchberger, Erica (2015). "The Growth of Gothic Identity in Visigothic Spain: The Evidence of Textual Sources". In Quirós Castillo, Juan Antonio; Castellanos García, Santiago (eds.). Identidad y Etnicidad En Hispania: Propuestas Teóricas y Cultura Material En Los Siglos V-VIII. Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco. ISBN 978-8490822142.
- Burlacu, Mihai (2010). "Istro-Romanians: the legacy of a culture". Bulletin of the "Transilvania" University of Brașov. 3 (52): 15–22.
- Caló Levi, Annalina (1952). Barbarians on Roman Imperial Coins and Sculpture. American Numismatic Society. ISBN 978-0-598-36890-4.
- Cameron, Averil (2009). The Byzantines. Oxford: John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 978-1-4051-9833-2.
- Conant, Jonathan P. (2015). "Romanness in the Age of Attila". In Maas, Michael (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Attila. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-02175-4.
- Darling Buck, Carl (1916). "Language and the Sentiment of Nationality". American Political Science Review. 10 (1): 44–69. S2CID 146904598.
- Dawson, Christopher; Farquharson, Alexander (1923). "The Beginnings of Rome". The Sociological Review. a15 (2): 132–147. S2CID 142995559.
- Delogu, Paolo (2018). "The post-imperial Romanness of the Romans". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Dench, Emma (2010). "Roman Identity". In Barchiesi, Alessandro; Scheidel, Walter (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Roman Studies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-921152-4.
- Diemen, Daan van (2021). "Becoming Roman? Romanness, Non‐Romanness, and Barbarity in Pacatus' Panegyric on Theodosius". Kleos: Amsterdam Bulletin of Ancient Studies and Archaeology. 4: 43–57. ISSN 2468-1555.
- Drugaș, Șerban George Paul (2016). "The Wallachians in the Nibelungenlied and their Connection with the Eastern Romance Population in the Early Middle Ages". Hiperboreea. 3 (1): 71–124. S2CID 149983312.
- Efstathiadou, Anna (2011). "Representing Greekness: French and Greek Lithographs from the Greek War of Independence (1821–1827) and the Greek-Italian War (1940–1941)" (PDF). Journal of Modern Greek Studies. 29 (2): 191–218. S2CID 144506772.
- Faniko, Irvin; Karamuço, Ervin (2015). "Constitutional Law: A Fundamental Right at the Threshold of Globalization" (PDF). ICRAE2015 Conference-Proceedings. ISSN 2308-0825. Archived from the original(PDF) on 2022-01-06. Retrieved 2021-08-10.
- Feldman, Louis H. (1995). "Review: Attitudes to Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period: Reflections on Feldman's "Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World"". The Jewish Quarterly Review. 85 (3/4): 361–395. JSTOR 1454723.
- Forsythe, Gary (2005). A Critical History of Early Rome: From Prehistory to the First Punic War. University of California. JSTOR 10.1525/j.ctt1ppxrv.
- Gess, Randall; Lyche, Chantal; Meisenburg, Trudel, eds. (2012). Phonological Variation in French: Illustrations from three continents. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 1–397. ISBN 978-90-272-7318-5.
- Gillett, Andrew (2002). "Was Ethnicity Politicized in the Earliest Medieval Kingdoms?". On Barbarian Identity: Critical Approaches to Ethnicity in the Early Middle Ages. Studies in the Early Middle Ages. Brepols Publishers. ISBN 978-2-503-53872-3.
- Granier, Thomas (2018). "Rome and Romanness in Latin southern Italian sources, 8th - 10th centuries". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Greene, Molly (2015). The Edinburgh History of the Greeks, 1453 to 1768. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0-7486-9399-3.
- Gruen, Erich S. (2013). "Did Ancient Identity Depend on Ethnicity? A Preliminary Probe". Phoenix. 67 (1/2): 1–22. S2CID 164312914.
- Gruen, Erich S. (2014). "Romans and Jews". In McInerney, Jeremy (ed.). A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-4443-3734-1.
- Halsall, Guy (2018). "Transformations of Romanness: The northern Gallic case". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Hatzopoulos, Marios (2009). "From resurrection to insurrection: 'sacred' myths, motifs, and symbols in the Greek War of Independence". In Beaton, Roderick; Ricks, David (eds.). The Making of Modern Greece: Nationalism, Romanticism, and the Uses of the Past (1797–1896). Routledge. ISBN 978-1-138-38272-5.
- Hen, Yitzhak (2018). "Compelling and intense: the Christian transformation of Romanness". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Hope, Valerie M. (1997). "Constructing Roman identity: Funerary monuments and social structure in the Roman world". Mortality. 2 (2): 103–121. .
- Institute for Neohellenic Research (2005). The Historical Review. Vol. II. Athens: Institute for Neohellenic Research.
- Jones, A. H. M. (1962). "The Constitutional Position of Odoacer and Theoderic" (PDF). The Journal of Roman Studies. 52 (1–2): 126–130. S2CID 163824464.
- Kafadar, Cemal (2007). "A Rome of One's Own: Cultural Geography and Identity in the Lands of Rum". Muqarnas. 24: 7–25. .
- Kakavas, George (2002). Post-Byzantium: The Greek Renaissance 15th–18th Century Treasures from the Byzantine & Christian Museum, Athens. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture. ISBN 978-960-214-053-6.
- Kaldellis, Anthony (2007). Hellenism in Byzantium: The Transformations of Greek Identity and the Reception of the Classical Tradition. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-87688-9.
- Kaplanis, Tassos (2014). "Antique Names and Self-Identification: Hellenes, Graikoi, and Romaioi from Late Byzantium to the Greek Nation-State". In Tziovas, Dimitris (ed.). Re-imagining the Past: Antiquity and Modern Greek Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 81–97.
- Korais, Adamantios (1805). Dialogue between two Greeks. Venice.
- Lavan, Myles (2016). "The Spread of Roman Citizenship, 14–212 CE: Quantification in the Face of High Uncertainty" (PDF). Past & Present. 230 (1): 3–46. hdl:10023/12646.
- Light, Duncan; Dumbrăveanu Andone, Daniela (1997). "Heritage and national identity: Exploring the relationship in Romania". International Journal of Heritage Studies. 3 (1): 28–43. .
- Makrygiannis, Strategus (1849). Memoirs (book 1). Athens.
- Mathisen, Ralph W. (2012). "Clovis, Anastasius, and Political Status in 508 C.E.: The Frankish Aftermath of the Battle of Vouillé". In Mathisen, Ralph W.; Shanzer, Danuta (eds.). The Battle of Vouillé, 507 CE: Where France Began. De Gruyter. pp. 79–110. ISBN 978-1-61451-099-4.
- Mathisen, Ralph W. (2015). "Barbarian Immigration and Integration in the Late Roman Empire: The Case of Barbarian Citizenship". In Sänger, Patrick (ed.). Minderheiten und Migration in der griechisch-römischen Welt. BRILL. ISBN 978-3-506-76635-9.
- Merry, Bruce (2004). Encyclopedia of Modern Greek Literature. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-30813-0.
- Milavec, Tina (2020). "The Transformations in Roman Identity in the South-Eastern Alps During the Migration Period". Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 71: 89–100. S2CID 225836506.
- Minahan, James (2000). One Europe, Many Nations: A Historical Dictionary of European National Groups. Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-313-30984-7.
- Morrison, Susannah (2018). ""A Kindred Sigh for Thee": British Responses to the Greek War for Independence". The Thetean: A Student Journal for Scholarly Historical Writing. 47 (1): 37–55.
- Mosca, Matthew W. (2010). "Empire and the Circulation of Frontier Intelligence: Qing Conceptions of the Ottomans". Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies. 70 (1): 147–207. S2CID 161403630.
- ISBN 978-0-511-58369-8.
- Omissi, Adrastos (2018). Emperors and Usurpers in the Later Roman Empire: Civil War, Panegyric, and the Construction of Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0198824824.
- Özbaran, Salih (2001). "Ottomans as 'Rumes' in Portuguese Sources in the Sixteenth Century". Portuguese Studies. 17: 64–74. S2CID 245845672.
- Parker, Eugene Johan Janssen (2018). Vandalia: Identity, Policy, and Nation-Building in Late-Antique North Africa (Master's thesis). Victoria University of Wellington.
- Phrantzes, Ambrosius (1839). Επιτομή της Ιστορίας της Αναγεννηθείσης Ελλάδος [Abridged history of the Revived Greece] (in Greek). Vol. 1. Athens.
- Pohl, Walter (2014). "Romanness: a multiple identity and its changes". Early Medieval Europe. 22 (4): 406–418. S2CID 154201199.
- Pohl, Walter (2018). "Introduction: Early medieval Romanness - a multiple identity". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Rich, John; Shipley, Graham (1995). War and Society in the Roman World. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-12167-5.
- Ridley, Jasper (1976). Garibaldi. Viking Press. ISBN 978-0-670-33548-0.
- Revell, Louise (2009). Roman Imperialism and Local Identities. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-88730-4.
- Rochette, Bruno (2012). "Language Policies in the Roman Republic and Empire". In Clackson, James (ed.). A Companion to the Latin Language. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. pp. 549–563. ISBN 978-1-4051-8605-6.
- "Rome Population 2020". World Population Review. Retrieved 16 January 2020.
- Roudometof, Victor (2008). "Greek Orthodoxy, Territoriality, and Globality: Religious Responses and Institutional Disputes". Sociology of Religion. 69 (1): 67–91. JSTOR 20453198.
- Rubel, Alexander (2020). "What the Romans really meant when using the term 'Barbarian'. Some thoughts on 'Romans and Barbarians'". In Curcă, Roxana-Gabriela; Rubel, Alexander; Symonds, Robin P.; Voß, Hans-Ulrich (eds.). Rome and Barbaricum: Contributions to the Archaeology and History of Interaction in European Protohistory. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd. ISBN 978-1-78969-103-0.
- Ružica, Miroslav (2006). "The Balkan Vlachs/Aromanians awakening, national policies, assimilation". Proceedings of the Globalization, Nationalism and Ethnic Conflicts in the Balkans and Its Regional Context: 28–30. S2CID 52448884.
- Sánchez-Ostiz, Álvaro (2018). "Claudian's Stilicho at the Urbs: Roman Legitimacy for the Half-Barbarian Regent". In Burgersdijk, Diederik W. P.; Ross, Alan J. (eds.). Imagining Emperors in the Late Roman Empire. BRILL. ISBN 978-90-04-37089-0.
- Sanders, Henry A. (1908). "The Chronology of Early Rome". Classical Philology. 3 (3): 316–329. S2CID 161535192.
- Sarti, Laury (2016). "Frankish Romanness and Charlemagne's Empire". Speculum. 91 (4): 1040–1058. S2CID 163283337.
- Smarnakis, Ioannis (2015). "Rethinking Roman Identity after the Fall (1453): Perceptions of 'Romanitas' by Doukas and Sphrantzes". Byzantina Symmeikta. 25: 211–234. .
- Snowden, Frank M. (1997). "Misconceptions about African Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean World: Specialists and Afrocentrists". Arion: A Journal of Humanities and the Classics. 4 (3): 28–50. JSTOR 20163634.
- Sorrill, Benjamin (2012). AD 450: Cultural Identity in Sub-Roman Britain (Bacherlor's thesis). University of Leicester.
- Śliżewska, Karolina (2018). Invaders of Victims? Roman views of the Barbarians across Late Antiquity (B. A. honours thesis). Aberystwyth University.
- Stouraitis, Yannis (2014). "Roman identity in Byzantium: a critical approach". Byzantinische Zeitschrift. 107 (1): 175–220. .
- Stouraitis, Yannis (2017). "Reinventing Roman Ethnicity in High and Late Medieval Byzantium" (PDF). Medieval Worlds. 5: 70–94. .
- Stouraitis, Yannis (2018). "Byzantine Romanness: From geopolitical to ethnic conceptions". In Pohl, Walter; Gantner, Clemens; Grifoni, Cinzia; Pollheimer-Mohaupt, Marianne (eds.). Transformations of Romanness: Early Medieval Regions and Identities. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-059838-4.
- Thompson, Lloyd (1993). "Roman Perceptions of Blacks". Electronic Antiquity: Communicating the Classics. 1 (4). Retrieved 9 May 2017.
- Vandiver Nicassio, Susan (2009). Imperial City: Rome under Napoleon. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-57973-3.
- Voutira, Eftihia A. (2006). "Post-Soviet Diaspora Politics: The Case of the Soviet Greeks". Journal of Modern Greek Studies. 24 (2): 379–414. S2CID 143703201.
- Wilcox, Charlie (2013). "Historical Oddities: The Roman Commune". The Time Stream. Retrieved 2016-12-18.
- Williams, Guy A. J. (2018). Defining a Roman Identity in the Res Gestae of Ammianus Marcellinus: the dialogue between 'Roman' and 'foreign' (PDF) (Doctoral thesis). University of Manchester.
- Woolf, Greg (2000). Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilization in Gaul. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-78982-0.
- Yavetz, Zvi (1998). "Latin Authors on Jews and Dacians". Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte. 47 (1): 77–107. JSTOR 4436494.