Veyne, Paul. “Pleasure and excess in the Roman Empire.” The Roman Empire Cambridge, Mass. : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1997. 101-116. When people think of Roman culture, they see violence, lust, and betrayal of one another. This perception is due to the influence of novels, films and television shows depicting such actions. However, as most revolve around the past, there is much more to the culture of the Roman people. To prove that the culture of Rome is not what it seems, historian Paul Veyne published "Pleasure and Excess in the Roman Empire" to explain to the public more about the culture they are not fully aware of in the article. But to what extent does Veyne's explanation in his book carry any weight and does it explain these facts rather well? At first glance at the story, Veyne appears to organize his topic paragraphs by topic and breaks them down before moving on to the next topic, much like a formal essay. . For example, from the first to the second paragraph, Veyne writes on the same subject but transformed into different subcategories. The only sources used by Veyne come from his own book "Pleasure and excess in the Roman Empire", as seen at the top of the page. Since the information comes from Veyne's own knowledge, which would make everything he writes about questionable. However, since he was able to have the book published by such a reputable institute as Harvard University, there is great confidence in the veracity of his claims. There was a bibliography on the first page and as for the footnotes, there were many. The footnotes were very helpful, especially since there are many unfamiliar words and historical figures might be unfamiliar to the reader. The author of this article, Paul Veyne, a French historian...... middle of article...... the question to ask is whether Paul Veyne's writing style and the readability of the article helps or hinders it. The first impression of his writing style starts decently in his introduction and was particularly helped when he used a quote. This helps grab the reader's attention and makes them eager to read more. Veyne's body paragraphs are rather messy, however. On the plus side, they nicely display the information needed for each of its subject, but they are turned into an off-putting sensation. His conclusion is correct but at the same time we have the impression that he is going to address another subject. So the question remains: is Veyne's writing style suitable enough to prove his point? Well, if he changes the structure of his paragraphs to make them flow more smoothly, then Veyne's article would be a great read, but for now it's only okay at best..