To what extent was urbanization a vital tool in the construction of a “Roman” identity? (original) (raw)

Urbanization under the Republic and Empire took different forms and directions, implemented sometimes in the typical “Roman” way as in Augustodonum, Aosta and maritime colonies, while at other times it gradually mixed with existing urban centers as in Nimes, Sagalassus and eastern cities. Cities in the Roman world – because of their political, social and economic significance – played a key role in the political and cultural life of the empire, also affecting its citizens’ identity. As viewed by ancient writers and demonstrated by archeology, urbanization meant civilization and power in contrast with the “barbaric” and “uncivilized” western tribes, some eastern regions and countryside. The construction of politico-religious and public buildings, public works, fortifications, and celebration of festivals and ceremonies in a city greatly shaped its status and its inhabitants’ identity. The change in the elite’s ideology of a city under the late Republic and Principate displayed the progress of “Romanization” (acculturation) and the “Roman” identity’s dynamism, as observed in the diverse development and forms of urbanization across the empire. The city was a product of its society and ultimately the “centre of power,…privilege,…culture and…of knowledge”.