On the question about the scientific discoveries that today are seen as landmark innovations, I believe that the same could be said about many of the texts in Humanities. Some such as Locke wouldn’t fit into this category as much, since him as well as many of the other enlightenment writers were wealthy and already prominent individuals. The reason texts such as his or Marx’s would have survived this long is if they were of strong influence from the time of their creation. Others however, such as works by Toni Morrison and the work “Black skin white masks” may be considered the more controversial and non “landmark” as they are much newer and sit among a pool of many other writers arguing both similar points as well as thousands of other works that fit in the same category or discuss the same topics. While people like Toni Morrison have certainly had an influence and received fame for their work, it can’t be said that a work would be considered landmark until something well known and effective comes out of it such as a clear change in the way certain laws or policies might be carried out or written.
Is it not possible that there were many other scientists and possibly ordinary people who didn’t practice the arts that could have come to the same conclusions far before the people known for a certain theory did? Will archaeology discover any of these people in the future and how would that change things? On top of this, there could be individual self taught or ex scientists that have already made great advancements on their own that are being ignored for not being part of the official community of science.