Fully agree. This edutainment disclaimer also applies when it comes to explanations of archaeological sites and the ādaily lifeā of ancient populations. The stories the public hears are based on the best understanding of complex interpretations of ceramics, surface features, architecture, stratigraphy, etc. You could ask two equally talented archaeologists to interpret a site and get two equally convincing but completely different explanations. We just canāt know any of this for sure, itās all filtered through the lens of the researcher, their methods, and their biases. And thatās okay. The best we can do is apply the most relevant and current methodology to interpret the evidence, be transparent about potential shortcomings, and be willing to change our conclusions if better evidence arises.
Lots of people are uncomfortable with āthatās just our best possible guess at the moment,ā but thatās how interpretive social sciences work. Until we invent a time machine, educated guesses based on all the available evidence are the best we can do.