The concept of “Hellenization” is a versatile theoretical perspective that considers numerous identity changes emerging from all forms of contacts with the ancient Greece or with the Greek culture which have been taking place in different (past or present) social settings. It is fair to say that numerous authors have been using the concept without clearly defining it, ie without considering its coherent meaning, chronology and theoretical backgrounds. Nevertheless, the term directly implies some references to modern European perception about “others” who are, supposedly,“becoming Greek” or “Greek-like” by means of passive acceptance of the “superior” material culture, language, customs or other characteristics of the ancient Greek way of life which were incorporated into their local and previously “less developed” social settings (Dietler 1997: 296-297; Hodos 2006: 11). It is widely believed that the ancient “Hellenization” process, traditionally perceived as a simple and unilateral “spreading of GreeN influences”, without any recognition of reciprocity, resistance, and non-Greek agency in the Mediterranean, begins with the initial colonial encounters in the Archaic period. This process varies depending on the later social and historical contexts, subsequently resulting in some differences in the presupposed intensity of the identity changes. As a result, researchers usually focus on the Hellenistic period as a historic era characterized by the widespread Greek imperial domination, where the “Hellenization” is believed to be the most extensive and intensive aspect of this period.(Rostovtzeff 1941; Momigliano 1971). The reasons for this unilateral perspective are numerous and conclusive. Beginning with the eighteen-century Philhellenism and remaining prominent ever since, the enduring importance of the ancient Greek culture and material heritage as a form of symbolic capital has held a prominent role in the political development of modernity and social construction of the Western world. Starting from the Enlightenment period, this phenomenon has allowed for a possibility of discussing different aspects of the modern “Hellenization”. This perpetual interest in classical antiquity has allowed for the “western Hellenism”–a modern social construction of the classical antiquity as the “genealogical foundation”, the “birthplace” and the “cradle” of Western civilization as well as for the ultimate appreciation of the emerging European upper and middle classes as heirs to this classical heritage (Morris 2000: 37-76; Hamilakis 2007: 27, 76-83). Conceptual similarities and the same intellectual background with the traditional view on Roman heritage and “Romanization”(see Hingley 2000; 2005) are visible in every step.“Romanization” and “Hellenization” are two related and comparable European narratives that focus on the ancient Greece and Rome, which are both perceived as the “beginning”