When the Roman Empire conquered and incorporated the Greek city-states into the Empire, was there resentment towards the Romans among the Greeks and was there an active movement calling for independence? I am aware of there being a large-scale rebellion in Sparta at one point, which was brutally surpressed by the Romans, but are there any other examples of this?
Furthermore, I am interested in the development of Greco-Roman national identity as time went on in the Empire. We know that by the fall of the Western Empire, the Greeks living in the East still considered themselves to be Roman, well into the Middle Ages. I'm curious as to how the Greeks over time identified themselves to be Roman, despite the fact that they spoke their own language instead of Latin and have a history and culture that is more ancient than that of the Latins. During the height of the Roman Empire, say at 100 AD, was "Roman" identity firmly cemented in the Greeks' minds? And were there active movements advocating for the independence of Greek city-states from Rome during this period in particular?
Thanks in advance.
There was no rebellion in Sparta against Rome. Sparta was a member of the Achaean League, but that was lead by Corinth.
Anyway, the Roman wars that lead to their domination of Greece and the East were sort of halfway between rebellions and wars of conquest. They were numerous, but the process of conquest (ending, let's say, in 146 BCE) had been unimaginably destructive, and so Greece did not really have much in the way of capability to resist Rome in its immediate aftermath. The support for Mithridates in the 80s BCE show that there was still quite a bit of anti-Roman sentiment, but those wars were overwhelmingly Cappadocian Wars of conquest against western Asia Minor an Greece, albeit ones that were, at least at first, welcome to the conquered. However, Augustus' reorganization of provincial administration that placed a great deal more power in the hands of the locals and this really cooled the desire for revolt. By 100 CE there wasn't really any serious challenge to Roman rule in Greek areas.
On a broader level, "Roman" and "Greek" were not oppositional identities, because "Roman" was a political identity--primarily meaning Roman citizenship but increasingly membership in the Empire--while "Greek" was a cultural one, meaning Greek customs, language and education. Furthermore, Rome was not a nationalist state, and so did not feel threatened by strong regional cultural identities, and in fact throughout the second century the emperors strongly promoted Greek culture. Furthermore, Greek and local law prevailed in much of the East with Roman law merely as a layer on top, and some areas even maintained a political fiction of independence.
The classic article on this is Greg Woolf's "Becoming Roman, Staying Greek".