Following the consolidation of the Roman state into one political entity, naturally, assimilation of the conquered people was required. Cities were built up on the standard form of the castra (or military camp), following the model of the first Roman colonia, Ostia (today Ostia Antica).
One of the most powerful indicators of cultural change is language. The introduction of foreign language elements can be interpreted both as the progression and the destruction of an autochthonous culture. The increasing use of the Spanish language in certain parts of the United States may indicate to some the deterioration of a previously non-Hispanic culture, while to others, it represents an accommodation or evolution towards a changing demographic. The increasing presence of the English language in Asia and the Middle East may seem to some the infiltration of Western and even imperialist ideals, while others may see the exact same as a progressive act, equating the dispersal of Western ideals with social evolution.
Historically, the spread of language has occurred most radically in a concrete manifestation of the latter idea; that is, the imposition of language as an imperialist tool, a means of homogenizing conquered lands under the aegis of a common culture and a common language that previously only comprised a small geographic area.
Today, English, which was once spoken only by a relatively small population in northwest Europe, is spoken by some 400 million as a first language, and exposed to many more, doubtless due to the incredibly wide distribution of the British Empire from the 16th to the 20th centuries AD.
The same applied to Roman Empire. Latin, which was once confined to a village in west-central Italy, was spread across an area comprising much of western, central, and southern Europe and parts of North Africa by the middle for the 1st century BC.
Latin was used as a way of unifying what was a very diverse— ethnically, linguistically, and religiously— population. It seems that the only place in which Latin was not advocated to a strong degree was in the eastern portion of the empire, in Judea, Asia Minor, and Greece, where the language of choice was Koine Greek.
The great deal of respect for many aspects of Greek culture seems to have supplanted the need for imposing concretely Italic ideals in Greece; one only needs to read Cicero or visit any museum showcasing Roman antiquities to see this (indeed, according Suetonius, Caesar’s last words were in the Greek every educated Roman was to have studied).
Greece, while a subjugated land (with Corinth finally annexed by Mummius Achaius in 146 BC), was seen by many as the only source of true art, its arts and artisans prized above all: consider the Temple of Hercules Victor/ Tempio Rotondo (built in the Forum Boarium, ca. 120 BC), which, having an entirely Greek metrology and drafted margin masonry unique to Athens, was almost certainly designed by a Greek architect. A similar thing occurs with Metellus Macedonicus’s Temple of Jupiter Stator (ca. 146 BC), which similarly utilized a (likely captive) Greek architect by the name of Hermodorus of Salamis.
As such, we see a reluctance of the Romans to eschew Greek culture, in favor of blatant adoption. This is true elsewhere, but only to smaller degrees, and usually in the form of religious syncretism (cf. Mithraism, the cult of Magna Mater, etc.). The ability to appropriate the conquered Greek culture and language and display this appropriation was, perhaps oddly to us, prized and a sign of wealth and education in Rome.
In the western Empire, however, Latin took a strong hold. The Iberian Peninsula, Transalpine Gaul, parts of Dacia, Sardinia, the whole of Italy, and North Africa became the “victims” of complete Romanization. Today, we have evidence of this in the form of Catalan, Spanish, French, Romanian, Portuguese, Veneto, Sardu, and so on.
