@hue-man,
hue-man;132365 wrote:That's an analytic proposition. All Romans are Italian by definition.
No, it is a contingent proposition. If another country, say France (in order to give us a name to make our lives easier), had taken over Italy 200 years ago and still had it to this day, or just the part of Italy that includes Rome, then being a Roman would make one French, not Italian.
We can see this sort of thing clearly when thinking about people who are French, and not part of the Roman Empire (and therefore not Roman in another sense of that word), simply due to historical facts.
Being Roman (in the sense it was intended in my original example), means being from the city of Rome. And that is regardless of whether or not Italy has possession of it, so being also Italian is not a part of the definition of being a Roman at all.