ABSTRACT
Recent years have seen much work on the relationship between Greeks and the populations of southern Italy that were in situ before the Greeks arrived.1 While much of this work is interesting, the majority continues to be characterized by two tendencies that we regard as unhelpful. First, there is the uncritical acceptance of the writings of Greek and Roman authors and a corresponding inclination to interpret the archaeological record in traditional historical terms, in line with the ancient authors. We have written about this elsewhere, so will not pursue it further here (Whitehouse & Wilkins 1985). Equally invidious is the strongly pro-Greek prejudice of most scholars, which leads them to regard all things Greek as inherently superior. It follows that Greekness is seen as something that other societies will acquire through simple exposure-like measles (but nicer!). These attitudes are apparent in the vocabulary used to describe the process: scholars write of the ‘hellenization’ of southern Italy, rather than employing terms such as ‘urbanization’ or ‘civilization’. However, hellenization is a weak concept, lacking in analytical power, since it is evident that not all aspects of Hellenic culture are equally likely to have been adopted by the native south Italians, or at the same rate. The concept of hellenization may have some use in a restricted context, for a study of pottery styles or architecture, for instance. As a tool for examining profound changes in the organization of society it bypasses the relevant issues.
