I don’t really get what is mystifying archaeologists though. I didn’t see it mentioned in the article?
It seems to have something to do with a lack of evidence of trade lines between where this type of meteorite has been recorded before and where the arrowhead was found.
(As if there had to be some official ‘trade line’, or they’ve found every meteorite that ever fell...)
“I don’t really get what is mystifying archaeologists though. I didn’t see it mentioned in the article?”
Headline editors are instructed to add click-bait.
What is mystifying them is that the meteor that the arrowhead was made from was not a locally found meteor, but one that fell in an entirely different region.
They seem to have forgotten (or maybe just the author didn’t know) that this particular region (the Baltic) was already connected to everywhere else in Europe by the amber trade networks.
“I don’t really get what is mystifying archaeologists though. I didn’t see it mentioned in the article?”
I published 57 articles. Many times, I’d see the headline altered by the editor and have no idea it was my article. Sometimes it was almost as if they meant to write a headline for someone else and just stuck it over my byline. In chatting with the editor, I realized she had zero understanding of anything technical. She could plug in and turn on a lamp, but what made it light up might as well have been magic.
I’m mystified by the article title. Who wrote it? Why did they write it?