Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
I do not mean to belabor the point, but when you say that "by definition Romans are Italians," you use a definition that is (i) familiar only to you and (ii) sufficiently misleading.

By an even tighter definition, Franks are Germans in origin. To say that, however, would be so misleading as to negate history from the time of Charlemagne at least.

Location in Italy does not make everybody "Italian," just like location on the Balkans does not make disparate people their all "Balkans."

72 posted on 10/09/2009 2:10:22 AM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]


To: TopQuark

My definition of an Italian is fairly straightforward: a person native to Italy. Whether or not the Tyrol is Italy might be open to question. Whether or not Rome is, is not. I agree that the north western part of what we now call Italy was then Cisalpine Gaul and southern Italy and Sicily was Magna Grecia, but Rome was always Italian. What occured from about 300 BC to 500 AD was the Romanization of much of Europe including all of what today is Italy. Roman wasn’t italianized, Italy was romanized.


73 posted on 10/09/2009 4:50:31 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The People have abdicated our duties; ... and anxiously hope for just two things: bread and circuses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson