Romanization? Just a convenient "shorthand" for complex phenomena? Or a term that we should avoid...?
Haeussler, Becoming Roman? 2013
You can also look 'inside' the book on the Routledge Website: click here.
romanizzazione := Romanization Italian style... less a question of "identity", but of military conquest and political structures... (found in the Museo di Antichità, Torino. Photo: Häussler;
"Becoming Roman? Diverging identities and experiences in ancient north Italy // Wer wollte denn ein(e) Römer(in) werden in Nordwest-Italien...? // Qui a voulu devenir un romain en Gaule Cisalpine?
MThe aim of this book was to re-think our understandings of social and cultural change. My main interest has always been to understand people's motivations. People in Cisalpine Gaul, like those who lived north of the Alps, had their own cultural understandings, their own traditions, myths, religions,... But our archaeological and epigraphic suggests that they gave it all up, or most of it. But why? Rome had no real interest in imposing its own culture or deities on the conquered populations. We therefore need to consider a large number of developments that might have affected people's lives in NW Italy, starting with economic developments, migration, mobility, participation in Italy-wide structures, in colonial discourses, the resulting bricolage and creolization...
North-west Italy provides an interesting case study: Rome's fiercest enemies, the Celts/Gauls, became fully integrated in Roman Italy, acquiring Roman citizenship and senatorial status already under Julius Caesar. How was this possible? As we will see, it was a long journey, and the people in North Italy were not always interested in Roman culture... As the title suggests, the question is whether people really wanted to become "Roman" at all...
Disclaimer: The book was finally published in the series of UCL's Institute of Archaeology London by Left Coast Press in California in 2013 and is now part of Routledge in 2013. But unfortunately the relationship with the Left Coast Press editor(s) was far from perfect. Let's put it this way: the outsourced editor re-wrote my text to such an extent, that I could hardly recognise it... and unfortunately not for the better. It should be only minor errors! I was not given the proofs for important sections of this book prior to publication! And in previous "proofs", the editors had generated a number of incredible mistakes (like turning the common word "forum" into "form"(!), or the "Low Countries" [i.e. the Netherlands] became the "lower countries", or truncating sentences and references, and many more). The American editor also messed about with the bibliography! Despite all my attempts, I am not sure whether all mistakes were corrected in the final version. Moreover, there are mistakes in the index which I was only allowed to see after the book went to the printer! Too late for any corrections! For example, you will find Pliny the Elder and Pliny the Younger under the same heading, Isidore became "Hebrew Isidore" for some unknown reason (well, the "highly qualified indexer" responsible for the index obviously did not know anything about the ancient world, and she categorically refused to take any advise!!!). And unfortunately there is no index of epigraphic sources (e.g., CIL, AE, SuppIT, Inscr.It., etc.), although I explicitely asked for it. Hence, it is a good idea to use the e-book or GoogleBooks to search for keywords in "Becoming Roman?". But if you could kindly overlook these pointless (and avoidable) mistakes, I hope you will find the book interesting!
Please watch this space for possible corrections and addenda, once the book has been published. And if you do notice any ideosyncrasies in the book, please contact me so that I can add them here ([email protected]) Thank you!
Please find below a series of images from the book in better quality and resolution. The map, for example, is hardly usable in the published version. More to come when I find the time!
Some images from "Becoming Roman?" / Ein paar Bilder aus "Becoming Roman?" in Farbe...
Some key objects 3rd-1st century BC // Leitmotive post-conquest objects, but still "embedded" in local "indigenous" traditions: there is change, and these types of objects were developping and changing, but there is hardly any orientation towards Rome down to the 1st century BC, some 150+ years after Rome conquered the region!
The "vasi a trottola" not only remained meaningful for generations after the Roman conquest, it also further developed in a nominal Roman period; they remained clearly distinct from the objects that would replace them from around c.50 BC, the Roman-style olpai. We mainly find them in a funerary context: are we dealing with archaising trends? were the vasi a trottola long gone in people's everyday life...? After all, the people should have received Latin rights between 89 and 49 BC.
Similarly, there are the Padane drachmas, a coinage typical for Cisalpine Gaul: they would become increasingly abstract (or "Celtic", i.e. similar to Transalpine La Tène art) in the post-conquest period; in and around Lombardy these drachmas even received coin legends in Celtic from c.100 BC.
Our third object is the famous bilingual stele from Vercelli/Vercellae - the Latin text comes first and contains more information. But the Latin text is unusual for an inscription. It is unique, showing the dedicant's wish to use Latin in Vercelli perhaps for the first public inscription, but he does not follow any Roman model: the choice of stone is unconventional and reflects indigenous understandings; the content is also indigenous ("un-Roman") as this stone demarcates a sacred space dedicated to gods and humans... hence the attempt to translate these concepts into Latin (unlike the standardised formula we find in the Principate); moreover, the dedicant's name/title remains untranslated! And all this in the context of a community, Vercelli, that should already have become a colonia Latina.... a Roman-style colony whose inhabitants had Latin rights.
Map of sites mentioned in my book "Becoming Roman?". The numbers refer to the little site index in this book. This is Fig. I.1 in the book, but it's rather tiny and only black & white. The base map is an adaptation and compilation from various maps of the Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World, ed. by Richard Talbet, courtesy of the Ancient World Mapping Center and Princeton University Press.
VASO A TROTTOLA / KREISELFLASCHE - much more beautiful when you see one IN COLOUR! One of these beautiful La Tène "vasi a trottola" that are so typical for North Italy, esp. Lombardy and Piedmont, between approx. 250 and 50 B.C. This one comes from Dormelletto and can be found today in the Museo di Antichità in Turin, a museum that is worth a visit! (cf. http://museoarcheologico.piemonte.beniculturali.it/ - photo: Ralph Häussler).
The Padane drachma, dramma Padana What used to be a coin modelled on the Marseille drachma has become increasingly "native" (increasingly abstract art, similar to contemporary Transalpine La Tène art) in a nominally Roman period. Moreover, Celtic coin legends ("Lepontic") increasingly made an appearance in North Italy (Lombardy and Piedmont) from around 100 BC onwards... What does it tell us about Roman imperialism in this period? The Romans were present, and they were exploiting resources (like the gold mines in the Bessa), but their impact seems limited. Eventually, Roman coins took over, but not the denarius, but the victoriatus, specially minted for Cisalpine Gaul! What does this tell us about the cultural and political understandings of the elites in north-west Italy in this period...? A deliberate sign of "cultural resistance" - is this really possible? Does it mainly reflect people's personal and trade links with Transalpine Gaul...? Is it their attempt to consolidate their power in a changing world, by making use of existing artefacts...?
Cisalpine "Padane" drachma from c.100 BC with Celtic/Lepontic coin legend "toutiopouous".
The famous bilingual inscription from Vercelli: in Latin and "Lepontic" (or rather the local Celtic dialect that was spoken around Vercelli in the 1st century B.C.). (photo: Ralph Häussler, courtesy of Museo Leone di Vercelli: see www.museoleone.it).
Well, as we have seen, things were not very "Roman" in NW Italy between the Roman conquest and the mid-1st century BC. And yet, "romanizzazione" is such a standard term in Italy! It is even use to denote an era, covering the whole period of Roman conquests down to Augustus... Yes, people's lives were changing, but only gradually. Is it not time to jettison this term?
More to come...
Disclaimer: please surf at your own risk... The information contained in this website is for general information purposes only. I endeavour to keep the information up-to-date and correct, but I cannot guarantee its completeness, accuracy, reliability or suitability. I am not responsible for any action taken as a result of the information or advice on my website. Through this website you are able to link to other, external websites which are not under my control; these links are being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; the inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them, and I bear no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content. Amazon Links: Some of the links for recommended books lead to Amazon website and include commercialisation. Copyright: The content of this website is protected by copyright. No portion of this website may be copied or replicated in any form without the written consent of the website owner. How to cite this page: