Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T01:47:40.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Vulgar and weak ‘Romanization’, or time for a paradigm shift? - S. Keay and N. Terrenato (edd.), ITALY AND THE WEST. COMPARATIVE ISSUES IN ROMANIZATION (Oxbow Books, Oxford 2001). Pp. xxii + 233, 44 figs. ISBN 1 84217 042 2. £24.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2015

David Mattingly
David Mattingly*
Affiliation:
School of Archaeology and Ancient History, University of Leicester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Roman Archaeology , Volume 15 , 2002 , pp. 536 - 540
Copyright
Copyright © Journal of Roman Archaeology L.L.C. 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf. Mattingly, D., Tripolitania (London 1995) 160–70Google Scholar, for a discussion of the cultural peculiarities of this region.

2 This is derived from his fuller study in JRA 12 (1999) 168–202 Google ScholarPubMed.

3 On the validity of the term Romanization, many contributors pick up the references to Webster, J. and Cooper, N., Roman imperialism. Post-colonial perspectives (Leicester 1996)Google Scholar and Mattingly, D. J. (ed.), Dialogues in Roman imperialism (JRA Suppl. 23, 1997)Google Scholar, but most fail to confront squarely the issues raised in those works.

4 Freeman, P., “Mommsen to Haverfield: the origin of studies of Romanization in late 19th-c. Britain,” in Mattingly, (supra n.3) 27–50 Google Scholar; Hingley, R., Roman officers and English gentlemen. The imperial origins of Roman archaeology (London 2000)Google Scholar; Mattingly, D., “From one colonialism to another: imperialism in the Maghreb,’ in Webster, and Cooper, (supra n.3) 49–69 Google Scholar.

5 Roman papers 4 (Oxford 1988) 64 Google Scholar (= Diogenes 124 [1983] 33–46)Google ScholarPubMed.

6 James (206) notes the similar debate about the use of the words ‘Celtic’ and ‘Celt’ (and their many European variants), where one senses the tide has turned against their uncritical inclusion in serious scholarship about the Iron Age. See further his The Atlantic Celts. Ancient people or modem invention? (London 1999)Google Scholar.

7 Berry, J. and Laurence, R., Cultural identity in the Roman empire (London 1998)Google Scholar; James, S. and Millett, M., Britons and Romans: advancing an archaeological agenda (London 2001)Google Scholar, contains several pertinent papers; Jones, S., The archaeology of ethnicity (London 1997) esp. 129–35Google Scholar; Woolf, G., “Beyond Romans and natives,” World Archaeology 28 (1997) 339–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Mattingly (supra n.3) esp. 7-26, after Said, E., Culture and imperialism (London 1993) 35–50 Google Scholar; cf. Fincham, G., “Romanization, status and the landscape. Extracting a discrepant perspective from survey data,” in id. et al. (edd.), TRAC 99 (Oxford 2000) 30–36 Google Scholar.

9 Millett, M., The Romanization of Britain (Cambridge 1990)Google Scholar; Woolf, G., Becoming Roman. The origins of provincial civilization in Gaul (Cambridge 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Hingley, R., “The legacy of Rome: the rise, decline and fall of the theory of Romanization,” in Webster, and Cooper, (supra n.3) 35–48 Google Scholar; id., “Resistance and domination in Roman Britain,” in Mattingly, (supra n.3) 81–100 Google Scholar; Webster, J., “Roman imperialism and the ‘post-imperial age’,” in Webster, and Cooper, 1–17 Google Scholar; ead., “At the end of the world: Druidic and other revitalization movements in post-conquest Gaul and Britain,” Britannia 30 (1999) 1–20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ead., “A negotiated syncretism: readings on the development of Romano-Celtic religion,” in Mattingly, (supra n.3) 153–61Google Scholar.

11 Metzler, J. et al. (edd.), Integration in the Roman West. The role of culture and ideology (Luxembourg 1995)Google Scholar.

12 Webster, J., “Creolizing the Roman provinces,” AJA 105 (2001) 209–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar (the significance of this excellent article extends far beyond the apparent focus of its title; it offers a challenging review of Romanization studies as a whole).

13 Mattingly (supra n.3) 11-15; Forcey, C., “Beyond ‘Romanization’: technologies of power in Roman Britain,” in Meadows, K. et al. (edd.), TRAC 96 (Oxford 1997) 15–21 Google Scholar; S. James in James and Millett (supra n.7) 78-80. Cf. also the theoretical work of Foucault, M., Power, truth and strategy (Sydney 1979)Google Scholar.

14 Reece, R., “Romanization: a point of view,” in Blagg, T. F. C. and Millett, M. (edd.), The Early Roman Empire in the West (Oxford 1990) 30–34 Google Scholar; Webster, J., “Interpretatio: Roman word power and the Celtic gods,” Britannia 26 (1995) 153–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Scott, S. and Webster, J. (edd.), Provincial art and Roman imperialism (Cambridge)Google Scholar, will shortly provide a set of studies of non-metropolitan Roman art, focused on issues relating to the use of ‘art’ in an imperial context.

15 Terrenato, N., “The Romanization of Italy: global acculturation or cultural bricolage,” in Forcey, C. et al., TRAC 97 (Oxford 1998) 20–27 Google Scholar.

16 The lack of consensus on the meaning of this term is all too apparent in the following selection: Blazquez, J. M. and Alvar, J. (edd.), La romanización en Occident (Madrid 1996)Google Scholar; David, J.-M., la romanisation de l'Italie (Paris 1994)Google Scholar; Fentress, E. (ed.), Romanization and the city (JRA Suppl. 38, 2000)Google Scholar; MacMullen, R., Romanization in the time of Augustus (New Haven 2000)Google Scholar; Torelli, M., Studies in the Romanization of Italy (Edmonton 1995)Google Scholar.

17 The non-Italian origin of much Roman provincial material culture has long been appreciated by Roman archaeologists working in NW Europe. See Freeman, P., “‘Romanization’ and Roman material culture,” JRA 6 (1993) 438–45Google Scholar; Reece, R., My Roman Britain (Cirencester 1988) 1–14 Google Scholar.

18 The analysis by Woolf (174-75) of what he describes as the “Roman cultural revolution” is a particularly clear statement of this. See also Habinek, T. and Schiesaro, A. (edd.), The Roman cultural revolution (Cambridge 1997)Google Scholar; Wallace-Hadrill, A., “Rome's cultural revolution,” JRS 79 (1989) 157–64Google Scholar; Zanker, P., The power of images in the age of Augustus (Ann Arbor 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Creighton, J., Coins and power in late iron Age Britain (Cambridge 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Alcock, S. E. et al. (edd.), Empires: perspectives from archaeology and history (Cambridge 2001)Google Scholar; Miller, D., Rowlands, M. and Tilley, C. (edd.), Domination and resistance (London 1989)Google Scholar; Webster, J., “Necessary comparisons: a post-colonial approach to religious syncretism in the Roman provinces,” World Arch 28 (1997) 324–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 The annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conferences (TRAC) have provided an important forum for theoretical debate, notably among postgraduate UK researchers.

22 Woolf (supra n.9). However, the ambiguities of his model are well illustrated by his own maps, where the apparent ubiquity of Roman towns and roads throughout Gaul (figs. 4.6,5.1) is called into question by the very unequal distribution of inscriptions (fig. 4.5) that seems to show a predominant focus on the two main overland routes from the Mediterranean to the Rhine frontier (with a handful of harbours and other key sites on the routes towards the Atlantic or Channel coasts).

23 J. Webster has gone further than most in attempting to construct a ‘bottom-up view’ of Roman society, with interesting results (works cited in nn. 10,12,14 above)

24 Barrett, J., “Romanization: a critical comment,’ in Mattingly, (supra n.3) 51–64 Google Scholar.

25 Bouquier-Reddé, V., Temples et cultes de Tripolitaine (Paris 1992)Google Scholar; Mattingly (supra n.1) 167-69. Similar tendencies are apparent in Roman Britain: see Millett, M., Roman Britain (London 1995)Google Scholar 111 with maps 74-75, where the religious observances of the Roman army stand in contrast to both the towns and rural districts, which are equally distinct one from the other. On the Roman army as a peculiar and well-defined community within Roman society, see James, S., “The community of soldiers: a major identity and centre of power in the Roman empire,” in Baker, P. et al. (edd.), TRAC 98 (Oxford 1999) 14–25 Google Scholar; id., “Soldiers and civilians: identity and interaction in Roman Britain,” in James, and Millett, (supra n.7) 77–89 Google Scholar.