John Moles

2.2k citations
45 papers · 937 · h-index 18

Impact in

  • Anthropology top 0.5%
    • Classical Antiquity Studies
    • Historical and Literary Studies
  • Classics top 2%
    • Byzantine Studies and History
    • Medieval Literature and History

Papers in

John Moles

39 papers receiving 621 citations

Peers

John Moles
Comparison fields: 5 of 45
  • Anthropology 771
  • Classics 180
  • Archeology 446
  • Philosophy 443
  • Religious studies 57
Replace A. J. Woodman with:
A. J. Woodman United States
Jenny Strauss Clay United States
Richard Janko United States
Shadi Bartsch United States
G. O. Hutchinson United Kingdom
Gian Biagio Conte Italy
Alessandro Schiesaro United Kingdom
Duncan F. Kennedy United Kingdom
Karl Galinsky United States
D. S. Levene United Kingdom
John Moles relative to A. J. Woodman United States A. J. Woodman's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.5×
A. J. Woodman · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by John Moles

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of John Moles's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by John Moles with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites John Moles more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by John Moles

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by John Moles. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by John Moles. The network helps show where John Moles may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 8 scholars most cited alongside John Moles, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with John Moles Line = papers co-authored together John Moles links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 45 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 1995147
2 1978112
3 199368
4 198352
5 200247
6 199546
7 198345
8 198444
9 199536
10 200234
11 198528
12 199826
13 199426
14 199625
15 198325
16 198324
17 200719
18 199418
19 200717
20 198714

About John Moles

John Moles is a scholar working on Anthropology, Philosophy, Archeology, Organic Chemistry and Classics, having authored 45 papers that have together received 937 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Classical Antiquity Studies (26 papers), Classical Philosophy and Thought (14 papers), Organic Chemistry Synthesis Methods (9 papers), Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (7 papers), Byzantine Studies and History (5 papers), Biblical Studies and Interpretation (4 papers), Archaeology and Historical Studies (3 papers) and Historical and Linguistic Studies (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Anthropology (771 citations), Classics (180 citations), Archeology (446 citations), Philosophy (443 citations) and Religious studies (57 citations). John Moles has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and United States. Frequent co-authors include Antonina Alberti, David E. Hahm, Jean-Louis Ferrary, A. A. Long, Brad Inwood, Julia Annas, André Laks and Plutarch. Their work appears in journals such as The Journal of Hellenic Studies, The Journal of Roman Studies, Phoenix, Hermes and New Testament Studies.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact