The study of the relation between acculturation and identity in the Roman world has come a long way in the last couple of decades. The renewed emphasis on exploring discrepant experiences has...Show moreThe study of the relation between acculturation and identity in the Roman world has come a long way in the last couple of decades. The renewed emphasis on exploring discrepant experiences has enabled us to better appreciate the myriad ways in which the empire’s inhabitants where part of a single political continuum, yet each partaking in its ongoing creation on their own terms, adapting elements from their own cultural matrices in the face of imperial realities, duties, possibilities and limits. As a result - although we are somewhat freed from the overly simplistic paradigm of ‘Romanisation’ - studying the formulation of identity in the Roman Empire has become an ever more complex business. One discrepant experience which we are familiar with is the one lived by the author Lucian of Samosata. He was one of the main exponents of the cultural movement known as the Second Sophistic, a period of cultural revival and renewed self-awareness throughout the Greek east - now subjugated but unified by Rome. Like many of his contemporaries, his intimate attachment to Greek culture and its classical heritage did not exclude him from recognizing himself as a loyal and engaged citizen of the empire, enjoying the securities and chances the larger Roman world had to offer. That being said, his The Wisdom of Nigrinus remains one of Lucian’s more obscure works - in more ways than one. At face value, the words of his fictional philosopher could be viewed as those of a dissenter, forming a rousing anti-Roman pamphlet, a philosophical treatise that is potentially legible as a sophist’s rallying cry for Greek resistance against Roman rule and imperial society. However, considering Lucian’s notorious penchant for satire, the authoritative tone of the dialogue’s main voice doesn’t sit well with our expectations of the author. All things considered, the ambiguous Nigrinus dialogue yields important information about the state of the intercultural dialogue between Rome and the Greek east. At the same time, the dialogue stands as a testament to Lucian’s skill in imitating and experimenting with classical formats of literature, tying his reflections on high imperial society to the large repository of images of the classical world, creating a narrative universe in which contemporary satire is injected with a dose of cultural heritage that adds a sense of purpose and history to it. It is the general aim of this essay to map the multiple avenues available to construct a cohesive sense of identity within the Roman Empire in the second century C.E., specifically as they are explored by Lucian. Aside from evaluating the dialogue’s subject-matter, I have sought to dissect the lineage and effect of the form and style which Lucian has used in its composition. To this end, I have drawn from the various theoretical models that have been formulated in an attempt to reinvigorate the recent debate on Roman culture and the conterminous formulation of identity. In the same spirit of eclecticism displayed by influential scholars such as Jane Webster, Greg Woolf and Tim Whitmarsh, I have endeavoured to illuminate how its specific composition reflects its mixed literary heritage, to recognize the significance of the ways Lucian has chosen to comment on imperial culture and society, and in what sense his creative negotiation between cultures in literature reflects the ongoing transformation of imperial Roman culture in his day. In turn, Lucian grants us an opportunity to adjust our newest assumptions, and further refine our perception of Roman history.Show less
