Lack of citation and originality

Suppose someone produces an unusually original theory that is far ahead of the prevailing scholarship.

It might initially receive few citations because:

scholars do not understand its significance;

it challenges prevailing assumptions;

it does not fit current research fashions;

it belongs to an unfashionable field;

it is published in an inaccessible venue.

So:

Low citation count does not demonstrate low intellectual merit.

Likewise, if a scholar produces an argument contradicting the dominant interpretation, the work may receive citations precisely because people attack it.

Thus citation has at least two very different meanings:

Citation as recognition/support: "This scholar's work is useful."

Citation as criticism: "This scholar's argument needs to be refuted."

Therefore citation count cannot by itself tell us whether the scholarly community considers the proposition true.