This is a very complicated issue, and I can’t do it justice in a short internet post but I’ll try to give a few points.

The Roman point of view

Roman society was unusually open, and was willing to accept outsiders into their midst. This went back to the legendary foundation of the City, when Romulus offered asylum to all comers and allowed them to become citizens. Although we don’t know if that asylum really happened or not, we do know how in the historical era Roman citizenship was granted to foreign local elites or colonial status to existing towns. This openness was rare – perhaps unique – in the ancient Mediterranean.

That is not to say there wasn’t conflict. Often Romans looked down upon outsiders and were disgusted with the idea of foreigners being given the same benefits as themselves. It was a huge scandal when Gauls were first admitted to the Senate. There was quite a bit of prejudice against Greeks, Greek culture and the Greek language at different times and by different people.

Yet on the other hand many Romans were enamoured of the Greeks and admired their accomplishments. The Emperor Hadrian, for example, was said to have been particularly fond of them. Prominent Greeks throughout the East were given Roman citizenship.

The Greeks point of view

We have the same love-hate relationship from the Greeks. The Greek historian Dionysius of Halicarnassus loved Romans so much he tried to claim they were actually Greeks. This is because Greeks had historically been a more closed society, so Dion tried to make it easier for his Greek readers by claiming the two peoples were one and the same.

Another Roman-loving Greek was Aelius Aristides, who wrote the famous Roman Oration, or a praise-filled panegyric to how wonderful Rome and Antoniunus Pius was. Much like today’s ‘If you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere,’ Aristides went to the city of Rome to advance his career as an orator. To be really big, you had to succeed in Rome and be accepted by the Romans.

The Greeks were justifiably proud of their history and their accomplishments. It was tough for some of them to be subjugated to Rome. Nigrinus, which was written by the scathingly funny writer Lucian, is a satire filled with praise of Athens and condemnation of Rome. This work played to some of the hopes and fears of the Greek elite who found themselves in a new world.

It isn’t true that Greeks didn’t want to speak Latin, but it depended upon the individual circumstances. A local elite in Ephesus might have no need to speak Latin. Another who had broader ambitions in Rome or with Romans resident in the East would have to speak it.

The Roman-Greek relationship

So to sum up, the Romans were the rulers but the Greeks had the cultural superiority. This made it difficult for both sides. When Caesar defeated Pompey he advanced on Athens, which had supported Pompey. Caesar, understandably frustrated, said to the Athenians: ‘How often will the glory of your ancestors save you from self-destruction?’ This is a good snapshot of the relationship. They hated and loved each other.

Yet, in general, I would say that the marriage between the two was extremely successful. They needed each other, and both realised it. The Greeks knew what the Romans could offer, and the Romans knew what the Greeks could offer. They understood their strengths and weaknesses. There was a symbiotic relationship of sorts, and there was also a great synergy which would not have been possible if either side was left alone.

I am particularly interested in the Greek East under Roman rule, and one of my favourite books on this is Simon Goldhill’s Being Greek Under Rome: Cultural Identity, the Second Sophistic and the Development of Empire.