Agree. Another issue, when discussing this topic, is that Romans are believed to have adopted the Greek culture after the conquest of Greece. This is indeed mostly true, but not when it comes to the attitude towards foreigners, which could not be more dissimilar.
Greek culture was much more insular. Greek poleis really considered themselves to be superior to anyone who did not speak their language (which is what "barbarian" actually means). And, while they did invest in colonies, they were never really interested in conquering territories where other cultures were already present.
Needless to say, this kind of attitude does not lead to burgeoning territorial acquisition.
Romans were much more aggressive and warmongering, but they also showed some degree of acceptance of the cultures they assimilated. They allowed provinces to keep some of their pre-existing laws. They were fine with people worshipping their non-Roman gods, as long as they also recognized the divinity of the emperor. And, as I said, they routinely employed barbarians at all levels of their society (not just for slavery, as it is sometimes assumed).
Greek culture was much more insular. Greek poleis really considered themselves to be superior to anyone who did not speak their language (which is what "barbarian" actually means). And, while they did invest in colonies, they were never really interested in conquering territories where other cultures were already present. Needless to say, this kind of attitude does not lead to burgeoning territorial acquisition.
Romans were much more aggressive and warmongering, but they also showed some degree of acceptance of the cultures they assimilated. They allowed provinces to keep some of their pre-existing laws. They were fine with people worshipping their non-Roman gods, as long as they also recognized the divinity of the emperor. And, as I said, they routinely employed barbarians at all levels of their society (not just for slavery, as it is sometimes assumed).