Has anyone ever elaborated a less ethnocentric view of the relevance of the Roman Empire?

by swedocme

I'm an history major and I'm taking a course in religious studies. Today we had a lecture about how the Greek-Roman religious tradition was just one among the many and certainly not in any way a "starting point" for the history of religion. Plenty of peoples around the world already had their "religions" (or comparable concepts) and it's important to keep that in mind to have a less ethnocentric approach to the study of the subject.

Our professor also mentioned how the general view that the Romans were infinitely many times ahead of any other people on earth in their day is part of an ethnocentric construct mainly intended to paint us as the heirs of some mythical old forgotten wisdom (an inherently conservative position) and, as a consequence, works as a premise for our colonial approach towards non-european peoples.

This really enticed me so I asked him if he could recommend me something to read on the subject. He said he couldn't think of anything that cohesively elaborated an analysis in those terms and he would have to refer me to a number of different writings instead. And also, that since his specialties was religious studies, I could've probably gotten a better answer from an historian of that specific field.

So, I'm looking for books that elaborate on the role of the Roman Empire describing it in an (apparently) more realistic and less ethnocentric way. Can you help me?

EDIT: I see someone added "Balkans" to the title of my thread, what does it mean?

rusoved

EDIT: I see someone added "Balkans" to the title of my thread, what does it mean?

We have weekly themes to encourage/highlight questions about particular topics--this week's is the Balkans. There's a filter that automatically tags associated keywords (like Greek). The flair has been removed.