Another critical difference is the location of the oflactory epithelium. Theirs is located closer to the nostrils and lines the path inhaled air takes. Ours is up between our eyes and not in the direct path of incoming air.

Fashions are fleeting. Maybe the salt water made the wines better and today's enthusiasts (or connoiseeures) would find those Roman wines better with a splash of salt water than without. We won't know until we try a wine made that way - with and without the salt water.

I am wary of embracing ambiguous, relativist philosophies. They tend to appease and validate the masses and lull them into a false sense of comfort. The only people who come to be enrichmed by this are those who affirm the masses sense of quality or value about a product.

I appreciate that prefences change, but the crowd is not always wise. What appeals to the masses is not necessarily the pinnacle of viticultural achievement.

Nice summary.

But I would caution against the "it's all so subjective" mentality. While the difference between an 87 and 88 point wine is a matter of how the rating scale is structured (and how rigorously the taster follows its criteria), the fact is - as you point out - sensory assessment is alike a language. it can be learned and used reproducibly, consistently and reliably.

Don't buy into the "we're all so different and wine is h-so subjective" line.