Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can the ancient Romans be thought of as the ancient Italians in the same way that say, the ancient dynasties of China can be thought of as ancient predecessors to the modern Chinese people?
I think it's much harder to say that modern Italians have a claim as the "descendants of the Romans" then do modern Chinese to ancient China. The empire was so large and powerful that many nations can link their culture and heritage back to Rome and in many cases just as well as modern Italians can. For instance, Russians have a VERY strong link culturally to Rome via the Byzantine Empire and Orthodox Church. It is also important to note that Roman culture is pretty much Greek culture, so that is the correct root overall. The one thing the Italians have a bit of a trump card on over other western European nations is the Catholic Church. In the west it is the one organization/state that has the strongest cultural link to western Roman tradition over the centuries and it is pretty much an Italian dominated institution for much of its history.
Genetically, it's pretty much impossible to say. Modern Italians are a large admixture of various groups from all over Europe, Africa and the Middle East. However, Romans were as well and they pretty much defined a "Roman" as being based on where one was born within the empire and their families lineage.
Overall, I don't think there is enough of a link beyond anyone else to say that Italians alone own the title of "descendants of Romans". The Romans basically embody western civilization and any culture or people within that spehere can trace their lineage to the Romans (via either the western or eastern empire) and then back to the Greeks.
Ultimately that is the difference when it comes to the Chinese. China has been a rather monolithic culture in the same area for millenia. Certainly there was outside influence at times, but China has pretty much always been China. If China had fractured into several different component nations over 1,000 years ago that then developed relatively independent of each other getting various cultural inputs over that time from the outside, then it would look much like Europe does. Everyone could still trace their root to that single ancient culture, but none of them could claim to be the "descendants" because in reality they all are.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,087,446 times
Reputation: 11862
Kind of, I mean Roman culture was ancient Italianate culture, as were the Etruscans, although as they grew they incorporated influences from all over the Empire - for instance religion from both ancient Greece and Palestine. However, Italy the nation is quite different from the Roman Empire. Italy is a fairly modern state, and although there was some sense of Italian identity, the idea of an Italian nation or a new Italian 'Empire' didn't really emerge until the late 19th century. The modern city of Roma, Italy, is also quite different from the ancient Roman capital. During the Middle Ages Rome was actually a pretty insignificant city (it was largely emptied by the Bubonic plague) and didn't see a resurgence in population until the Renaissance.
I agree, Chinese culture is more unified, although it too expanded through a process of 'Sinification.' While 'Chinese culture' has it's roots millenia ago, it's never been a homogeneous entity: throughout much of it's history China HAS been divided into different nations, as different as the European nations or kingdoms or empires, and that sense of a united China actually emerged fairly recently. What's more, the 'Chinese homeland' is really the North China plain in Northern China. The process of Sinification of what is now the PRC has begun ever since, incorporation Southern China by the late Han dynasty, and arguably is still occurring today, as China makes inroads into places like Tibet and Inner Mongolia. The Huaxia tribes along the Huang He (Yellow River) are to 'Han China' what the early tribes of the area around Rome (and to an extent the Etruscans too) were to the Roman Republic/Empire.
Of course not.
When Caracalla granted citizenship to all citizens of the Roman Empire, all their 100 millions inhabitants became Roman.
The Italic peninsula and Rome do not equate, since Rome is a city-state that conquered the rest of the Italic peninsula, many of their inhabitants were at that time as strange as any "barbarian" since you had Celts, Oscs, Samnites, Greeks, etc.
There was even a war between the Italian peninsula (the Bull) and Rome (the She-worlf or Lupa).
Equating Roman and Italians is just like equating Americans with New Englanders.
A large part of the inhabitants of the Italic pensinsula are descendant of Middle Eastern and Greek slaves and libertos, they were the "accountants" and technicians that kept the Empire together.
There were parts of the Empire that were more "Roman" than Rome itself (spoke better Latin, preserved virtus, etc).
There were parts of the Empire that were more "Roman" than Rome itself (spoke better Latin, preserved virtus, etc).
So the Tuscan claim in the Middle Ages that they were the true heirs of Rome because of the Florentine dialect being closer to Latin than the Roman dialect etc. had some truth to it?
Also, Catalan nationalists claiming that Catalonia was a bastion of Romanitas during the empire and even afterwards under Gothic rule was not just puffery?
So the Tuscan claim in the Middle Ages that they were the true heirs of Rome because of the Florentine dialect being closer to Latin than the Roman dialect etc. had some truth to it?
Also, Catalan nationalists claiming that Catalonia was a bastion of Romanitas during the empire and even afterwards under Gothic rule was not just puffery?
You can't take Romantics seriously anywhere. Catalonia was not the most romanized area of Hispania and the Florentine dialect is not the closest to Latin, the Sardinian dialect is. Tuscan was the region of the Tusci, Etruscan. The original inhabitants of Catalonia and Septimania, Iberians, had an enormous Greek influence due to the city of Emporiom and Massilia.
But I rather find amusing when I hear Italo-Americans say they are descendants of Romans. A Syrian or an Ilirian was as Roman as an inhabitant of Medolanum.
In fact, during the last 250 years of the Empire, most of the Emperors were not born in Rome or the Italian peninsula, many were born in Hispania.
Rome was not Italy, Rome was the City of Rome and the ancestral gods.
Last edited by cojoncillo; 07-11-2012 at 05:39 PM..
Would it be fair to say Romans from Rome were ancient Italians though?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
