3 ms·
I think the archaeologist's conclusion is motivated by resentment of the 'elite'. He finds a small dog skeleton and concludes that it's evidence of elites fl
by mcpackieh 3y ago
I think the archaeologist's conclusion is motivated by resentment of the 'elite'. He finds a small dog skeleton and concludes that it's evidence of elites flexing on plebs. This interpretation of the evidence is motivated by his personal political feelings.
- rsynnott 3y agoEh... seems like a bit of a stretch; it's 1800 years ago, and the fact that wealthy Romans in the 3rd century tended to be a bit on the comically decadent side isn't exactly news. However, this would have been something of a political issue _at the time_; there is absolutely _nothing_ that Romans loved so much as moaning about other Romans being decadent. Arguably, if this was common practice, we might expect to documentary evidence in such moaning-oriented writings. :)