Yeah, it is even a bit funny that nothing in the actual text of the article supports the headline, either in the form of a quote from one of the archaeologists or the kind of finds that they list (a room, a well, an enclosure and a graveyard), of which none really qualifies as solid evidence of social and religious hubs.
But since the article was written by the university itself, I guess they just wanted to sensationalise the finds a bit for the layperson.
5 Comments
TerryCustard@feddit.uk · 3 pts · 2y
Gratuitous mattock shot
Emperor@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 2y
Never mind the mattocks.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
Did we not know this about monasteries?
yata@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2y
Yeah, it is even a bit funny that nothing in the actual text of the article supports the headline, either in the form of a quote from one of the archaeologists or the kind of finds that they list (a room, a well, an enclosure and a graveyard), of which none really qualifies as solid evidence of social and religious hubs.
But since the article was written by the university itself, I guess they just wanted to sensationalise the finds a bit for the layperson.
Emperor@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 2y
Also "Stuff dug up at ancient monastery" doesn't catch the attention quite so well.