
ARCHAEOLOGISTS, of whom I am one, are really quite remarkable people. It is notorious that the nomenclature of their study is already in a sad condition, yet, recently, they have gone out of their way to make confusion more confounded. It has now become the practice to describe early neolithic flint implements by the term mesolithic, a term which means, of course, Middle Stone Age. Some misguided individual, however, evidently possessing, in full measure, the common archaeological flair for promoting the use of a misleading terminology, has applied it to relics referable solely to the end of the Stone Age, and to make matters worse, the practice is becoming widespread. I find it necessary to remind myself that I am writing to the editor of a highly reputable scientific journal, and this knowledge, I confess, somewhat cramps my style. I would like to say many other things about the term mesolithic. But if archaeologists wish to retain a vestige of a reputation for reason, let them drop this word now, and for evermore.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
