2015/12/01 by Kōstas Vlassopoulos · 1 citation
Social Sciences · #Classical Antiquity Studies #Contemporary and Historical Greek Studies #Philippine History and Culture
paper · doi:10.1111/j.2041-5370.2015.12008.x
openalex publication_date 2015/12/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Abstract The study of ethnicity has become particularly popular over the last twenty years. This article explores certain unexamined assumptions concerning ancient ethnicity and points out certain important blind spots of modern research, focusing in particular on Jonathan Hall's contributions to the debate. Greek historians have devoted little time to thinking about the groups to which the concept of ethnicity is applicable: by exploring together the similarities and differences between poleis, regional, trans-regional, and Panhellenic ethnicities, some startling conclusions emerge. Furthermore, Greek historians have devoted little time to explaining why the concept of ethnicity is a better conceptual tool than that of nationality. But the concept of ethnicity tends to elide the question of an organised community and its shared activities in the formation of identity, with major resulting consequences. Instead of an essentialist definition of ethnicity, like that of Hall, I sketch an alternative framework that approaches ethnicity not as a static entity but as an open-endedprocess, in which the diverse Greek ethnicities moved variously within a spectrum, ranging between a collective and a communal pole.