Editing Piltdown Man forgery

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

This page supports semantic in-text annotations (e.g. "[[Is specified as::World Heritage Site]]") to build structured and queryable content provided by Semantic MediaWiki. For a comprehensive description on how to use annotations or the #ask parser function, please have a look at the getting started, in-text annotation, or inline queries help pages.

Latest revision Your text
Line 18: Line 18:
  
 
The Piltdown story provides a cautionary lesson on how scientists can get things wrong and how science, when applied correctly, can reveal error and malpractice.
 
The Piltdown story provides a cautionary lesson on how scientists can get things wrong and how science, when applied correctly, can reveal error and malpractice.
 +
 +
== Further reading and detailed bibliography ==
 +
 +
If you want to find out more about Piltdown then the following books would be a good place to start:
 +
 +
Russell, Miles, ''The Piltdown Man forgery: Case Closed ''(The History Press, 2012)
 +
 +
Spencer, Frank, ''The Piltdown Papers ''(Oxford University Press, 1990)
 +
 +
Walsh, John, ''Unravelling Piltdown: The Science Fraud of the Century and Its Solution ''(Random House, 1996)
 +
 +
Weiner, J S, ''The Piltdown Forgery ''(Fiftieth Anniversary edition, with a new Introduction and Afterword by Chris Stringer, Oxford University Press, 2003)
 +
 +
For a more detailed study of the whole Piltdown story, BGS Historian David G Bate has compiled a large [http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/507543/ annotated bibliography].
  
 
== Timeline ==
 
== Timeline ==
Line 127: Line 141:
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Dawson the ‘Wizard’ produces ‘Piltdown II’
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Dawson the ‘Wizard’ produces ‘Piltdown II’
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | On 9 January 1915,Dawson wrote to Smith Woodward; ‘I believe weare in luck again! I have got a fragment of the left side of a frontal bone with portion of the orbit and root of nose... the general thickness seems to me to correspond to the right parietal of ''Eoanthropus''’.Dawson omitted to mention the location of his find, noting only that it came from a ploughed field (Smith Woodward appears however to have been aware of the general location).  
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | On 9 January 1915,Dawson wrote to Smith Woodward; ‘I believe weare in luck again! I have got a fragment of the left side of a frontal bone with portion of the orbit and root of nose... the general thickness seems to me to correspond to the right parietal of ''Eoanthropus''’.Dawson omitted to mention the location of his find, noting only that it came from a ploughed field (Smith Woodward appears however to have been aware of the general location).  
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 018.jpg|150px|Charles Dawson (left) and Arthur Smith Woodward (middle) sifting gravel at Barkham Manor in the summerof 1913; Venus Hargreaves (right) was employed as labourer From ''Natural History: Journal of the American Museum'', Nov-Dec 1921]]
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 018.jpg|150px|Charles Dawson (left) and Arthur Smith Woodward (middle) sifting gravel at Barkham Manor in the summerof 1913; Venus Hargreaves (right) was employed as labourer © Natural History: Journal of the American Museum, Nov-Dec 1921]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" |  30 July, 1915  
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" |  30 July, 1915  
Line 141: Line 155:
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Charles Dawson, 1864-1916
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Charles Dawson, 1864-1916
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | On 10 August 1916, Charles Dawson died of septicaemia. He was 52 years of age.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | On 10 August 1916, Charles Dawson died of septicaemia. He was 52 years of age.
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 020.jpg|150px|Charles Dawson © The Geological Society (GSL/POR/49/17-01]]
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 020.jpg|150px|Charles Dawson, Public domain]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1917
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1917
Line 167: Line 181:
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Swanscombe
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Swanscombe
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | The status of Piltdown Man was also brought into question with the discoveries in 1935 and 1936 of early human cranial remains in association with stone tools at Swanscombe in north- west Kent. The discoveries were made by Alvan T. Marston, a London dentist, who had for two years past been searching the old ‘100 foot terrace’ deposits of the River Thames for Palaeolithic flint implements and fossil mammals. Arthur Keith professed the Swanscombe fragments to be those of early modern man (''Homo sapiens''), while Elliot Smith judged the new skull to be more primitive than Piltdown. The Swanscombe individual, who was probably a young woman, is now considered to be of Neanderthal affinity (''Homo neanderthalensis'').
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | The status of Piltdown Man was also brought into question with the discoveries in 1935 and 1936 of early human cranial remains in association with stone tools at Swanscombe in north- west Kent. The discoveries were made by Alvan T. Marston, a London dentist, who had for two years past been searching the old ‘100 foot terrace’ deposits of the River Thames for Palaeolithic flint implements and fossil mammals. Arthur Keith professed the Swanscombe fragments to be those of early modern man (''Homo sapiens''), while Elliot Smith judged the new skull to be more primitive than Piltdown. The Swanscombe individual, who was probably a young woman, is now considered to be of Neanderthal affinity (''Homo neanderthalensis'').
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 024.jpg|150px|Telegram from Alvan T. Marston to Henry Dewey of the Geological Survey informing him of the discovery of a skull fragment at Swanscombe, Kent, 1935 — ‘Swanscombe man’. BGS/NERC (P827762)]]
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 024.jpg|150px|Telegram from Alvan T. Marston to Henry Dewey informing him of the discovery of a skull fragment at Swanscombe, Kent, 1935 — ‘Swanscombe man’. BGS/NERC (P827762)]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1936
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1936
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Piltdown further undermined
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Piltdown further undermined
| style="vertical-align:top;" | There was another more serious problem raised by the Swanscombe finds. In 1925 Francis H. Edmunds of the Geological Survey was sent out to map the terrace deposits around Piltdown that had been omitted from earlier editions of the official geological map of the area. Edmunds demonstrated that the Piltdown gravel closely correlates with the Thames ‘50-foot terrace’ and is thus younger than the Swanscombe terrace deposits. It appeared therefore that an ape- like ''Eoanthropus ''had coexisted with modern man! Clearly something was amiss. Alvan Marston became convinced that the ape-like Piltdown jaw could not possibly have belonged with the essentially human Piltdown cranium, but must be a chance association.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | There was another more serious problem raised by the Swanscombe finds. In 1925 Francis H. Edmunds of the Geological Survey was sent out to map the terrace deposits around Piltdown that had been omitted from earlier editions of the official geological map of the area. Edmunds was able to demonstrate that the Piltdown gravel closely correlated with the Thames ‘50-foot terrace’ and is thus younger than the Swanscombe terrace deposits. It appeared therefore that an ape- like ''Eoanthropus ''had coexisted with modern man! Clearly something was amiss. Alvan Marston became convinced that the ape-like Piltdown jaw could not possibly have belonged with the essentially human Piltdown cranium, but must be a chance association.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 025.png|150px|Piltdown geological map. © BGS/NERC Edmunds' 1955 ]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 025.png|150px|Piltdown geological map. © BGS/NERC Edmunds' 1955 ]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1938
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1938
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | A memorial to Piltdown
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | A memorial to Piltdown
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Early in the 1920s a wooden memorial was erected at Barkham Manor on the site where the first ''Eoanthropus dawsoni ''had been found, and in 1938 Smith Woodward arranged for this to be replaced by a more permanent sandstone monolith. It was unveiled by Arthur Keith on 23 July 1938 and carries the following inscription: ‘Here in the old river gravel, Mr Charles Dawson, FSA, found the fossil skull of Piltdown Man 1912–1913. The discovery was described by Mr Charles Dawson and Sir Arthur Smith Woodward in the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 1913–15.’
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Early in the 1920s a wooden memorial was erected on the site where the first ''Eoanthropus dawsoni ''had been found, and in 1938 Smith Woodward arranged for this to be replaced by a more permanent sandstone monolith. It was unveiled by Arthur Keith on 23 July 1938 and carries the following inscription: ‘Here in the old river gravel, Mr Charles Dawson, FSA, found the fossil skull of Piltdown Man 1912–1913. The discovery was described by Mr Charles Dawson and Sir Arthur Smith Woodward in the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 1913–15.’
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 026.jpg|150px|Piltdown monument © David Bate]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 026.jpg|150px|Piltdown monument © David Bate]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1949
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1949
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Fluorine testing
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Fluorine testing
| style="vertical-align:top;" | In 1949 Kenneth P. Oakley of the Natural History Museum used a fluorine test to determine whether the Piltdown jaw and cranium were contemporaneous. Fossil bones and teeth accumulate fluorine over the course of time by absorption from circulating groundwater. By analysing the amount of fluorine contained in a sample of material it is possible to determine the relative ages of fossils. The test had already been used successfully on the Swanscombe finds. The Piltdown jaw and skull fragments yielded similar fluorine values and thus appeared to be contemporaneous. However, these values were much lower than those obtained from the Swanscombe individual, implying that Piltdown Man was of more recent geological age than originally thought.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | In 1949 Kenneth P. Oakley of the Natural History Museum used a fluorine test to determine whether the Piltdown jaw and cranium were contemporaneous. Fossil bones and teeth accumulate fluorine over the course of time by absorption from circulating groundwater. By analysing the amount of fluorine contained in a sample of material it is possible to determine the relative ages of fossils. The test had already been used successfully on the Swanscombe finds. The Piltdown jaw and skull fragments yielded similar values of fluorine values and thus appeared to be contemporaneous. However, these values were much lower than those obtained from the Swanscombe individual, implying that Piltdown Man was of more recent geological age than originally thought.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 027.jpg|150px|Dr Kenneth Oakley (left) and L. E. Parsons discussing sampling of the Piltdown jaw for fluorine analysis in 1949.© Natural History Museum(Image: 039914)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 027.jpg|150px|Dr Kenneth Oakley (left) and L. E. Parsons discussing sampling of the Piltdown jaw for fluorine analysis in 1949.© Natural History Museum(Image: 039914)]]
 
|-
 
|-
Line 198: Line 212:
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1953
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1953
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Doubts about authenticity
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Doubts about authenticity
| style="vertical-align:top;" | In 1953 Joseph S. Weiner, Professor of Physical Anthropology at Oxford University, was able to examine the original Piltdown remains. He had developed doubts about their authenticity and the more he looked at them the more the doubts grew. Weiner discovered that the Natural History Museum had no record of the exact spot where the remains of Piltdown II had been found. Yet this second site had been used to support the authenticity of the first Piltdown finds and to silence the critics. Piltdown II's lack of provenance was thus of serious concern.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | In 1953 Joseph S. Weiner, Professor of Physical Anthropology at Oxford University, was able to examine the original Piltdown remains. He had developed doubts about their authenticity and the more he looked at them the more the doubts grew. Weiner discovered that the Natural History Museum had no record of the exact spot where the remains of Piltdown II had been found. These location details had been used to support the authenticity of the original Piltdown finds; this lack of provenance was of great importance.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 029.jpg|150px|Joseph S. Weiner, Professor of Physical Anthropology at Oxford University.© Natural History Museum (Image: 040284)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 029.jpg|150px|Joseph S. Weiner, Professor of Physical Anthropology at Oxford University.© Natural History Museum (Image: 040284)]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1953
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1953
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | A forgery uncovered
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | A forgery uncovered
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Weiner became convinced that the teeth in the jaw had been filed down and thisindicated deliberate fraud. He obtained some chimpanzee teeth which he filed down and stained artificially in order to replicate the Piltdown molars. After discussing it with Wilfrid Le Gros Clark, Professor of Anatomy at Oxford, it was decided to contact Kenneth Oakley at the Natural History Museum and inform him of their suspicions. Oakley checkedthe teeth and was ‘utterly convinced’ that they had been artificially abraded. Further examination revealed that the canine tooth had been stained using a mixture which included Vandyke brown paint.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Weiner became convinced that the teeth in the jaw had been filed down and thisindicated deliberate fraud. He obtained some chimpanzee teeth which he filed down and stained artificially in order to replicate the Piltdown molars. After discussing it with Wilfrid Le Gros Clark, Professor of Anatomy at Oxford, it was decided to contact Kenneth Oakley at the Natural History Museum and inform him about theirsuspicions. Oakley checkedthe teeth and was ‘utterly convinced’ that they had been artificially abraded. Further examination revealed that the canine tooth had been stained using a mixture which included Vandyke brown paint.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 030.jpg|150px|Scanning electron microscope view of molar surface showing scratch marks. © Natural History Museum (Image: 039913)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 030.jpg|150px|Scanning electron microscope view of molar surface showing scratch marks. © Natural History Museum (Image: 039913)]]
 
|-
 
|-
Line 209: Line 223:
  
  
| style="vertical-align:top;" | ‘The biggest scientific hoax of the century’
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | ‘The Biggest Scientific Hoax of the Century’
| style="vertical-align:top;" | An announcement of the scientific team’s startling revelations appeared in ''The Times'' of 21 November 1953 under the headline ‘elaborate hoax’, and was quickly picked up by the popular press. A London evening newspaper, ''The Star'', presented the story as ‘The biggest scientific hoax of the century’. No attempt was made at this stage to identify the perpetrator, but subsequent newspaper reports soon homed in on Charles Dawson.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | An announcement of the scientific team’s startling revelations appeared in The Times of 21 November 1953 under the headline ‘Elaborate Hoax’, and was quickly picked up by the popular press. A London evening newspaper, The Star, presented the story as ‘The Biggest Scientific Hoax of the Century’. No attempt was made at this stage to identify the perpetrator, but newspaper reports quickly homed in on Charles Dawson.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 031.jpg|150px|Reconstruction of Piltdown Man by Maurice Wilson for the Exhibition of Britain 1950. © Natural History Museum (Image: 012680)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 031.jpg|150px|Reconstruction of Piltdown Man by Maurice Wilson for the Exhibition of Britain 1950. © Natural History Museum (Image: 012680)]]
 
|-
 
|-
Line 217: Line 231:
  
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Arthur Keith accepts the truth
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Arthur Keith accepts the truth
| style="vertical-align:top;" | On the day of the press release, Oakley and Weiner visited Arthur Keith, who was now well into his eighties. On being appraised of their findings, Keith replied ‘You may be right, Weiner, and I must accept it, but it will take me a little while to adjust to it.’ On 28 November Pierre Teilhard de Chardin wroteto Oakley from New York congratulating himon his solution of the Piltdown problem:‘Anatomically speaking, “''Eoanthropus''” was a kind of monster... Therefore I am fundamentally pleased by your conclusions,in spite of the fact that, sentimentally speaking,it spoils one of my brightest and earliest palaeontological memories.’
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | On the day of the press release, Oakley and Weiner visited Arthur Keith, who was now well into his eighties. On being appraised oftheir findings, Keith replied ‘You may be right, Weiner, and I must accept it, but it willtake me a little while to adjust to it.’ On 28 November Pierre Teilhard de Chardin wroteto Oakley from New York congratulating himon his solution of the Piltdown problem:‘Anatomically speaking, “''Eoanthropus''” was a kind of monster... Therefore I am fundamentally pleased by your conclusions,in spite of the fact that, sentimentally speaking,it spoils one of my brightest and earliest palaeontological memories.’
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 032.jpg|150px|The solution of the Piltdown Problem, Weiner et al., 1953. © BGS/NERC reproduction.]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 032.jpg|150px|The solution of the Piltdown Problem, Weiner et al., 1953. © BGS/NERC reproduction.]]
 
|-
 
|-
Line 224: Line 238:
  
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Confirmation of the fraud
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Confirmation of the fraud
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Over a period of several months the Piltdown remains were subjected to further tests. A full presentation of the scientific results was made at a meeting of the Geological Society on 30June 1954. The Piltdown jaw and canine were confirmed as being from a modern ape,probably a young female orangutan. The exceptionalthickness of the skull(essentially that of a modernhuman) might be explainedas a pathological condition,although such thickened craniaare met with in some modern populations.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Over a period of several months the Piltdown remains were subjected to further tests. A full presentation of the scientific results was made at a meeting of the Geological Society on 30June 1954. The Piltdown jaw and canine were confirmed as being from a modern ape,probably a young female orang-utan. The exceptionalthickness of the skull(essentially that of a modernhuman) might be explainedas a pathological condition,although such thickened craniaare met with in some modern populations.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 033.jpg|150px|A full presentation of the scientific results was made at a meeting of the Geological Society on 30 June 1954. © Natural History Museum (Image: 006967)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 033.jpg|150px|A full presentation of the scientific results was made at a meeting of the Geological Society on 30 June 1954. © Natural History Museum (Image: 006967)]]
 
|-
 
|-
Line 238: Line 252:
  
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Cricket bat carved with metal blade
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Cricket bat carved with metal blade
| style="vertical-align:top;" | The ‘cricket bat’ had been carved using a metal blade when the bone was already fossilised and had lost its brittleness. The newly cut surfaces had been stained with an iron solution and then varnished to reproduce, as nearly as possible, the appearance of the remainder of the roughly fashioned bone.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | The ‘cricket bat’ had been carved using a metal blade and after it had been already fossilised. The newly cut surfaces had been stained with an iron solution and then varnished to reproduce, as nearly as possible, the appearance of the remainder of the roughly fashioned bone.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 035.jpg|150px|A reproduction of the ‘cricket bat sketches’ by Dawson and Smith Woodward.© Natural History Museum (Image: 006665)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 035.jpg|150px|A reproduction of the ‘cricket bat sketches’ by Dawson and Smith Woodward.© Natural History Museum (Image: 006665)]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1955
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1955
| style="vertical-align:top;" | ‘Further contributions to the solution of the Piltdown problem’
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | ‘Further Contributions to the Solution of the Piltdown Problem’
| style="vertical-align:top;" | All of the new evidence was presented in a concluding report from the Natural History Museum entitled ‘''Further contributions to the solution of the Piltdown problem”'', issued 21 January 1955. The report concluded that ‘Not one of the Piltdown finds genuinely came from Piltdown.’ Within months of these latest revelations the last surviving principal protagonists in the Piltdown affair were dead. Arthur Keith died on 7 January, followed by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin on 10 April.
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | All of the new evidence was presented in a concluding report from the Natural History Museum entitled ‘''Further Contributions to the Solution of the Piltdown Problem”'', issued 21 January 1955. The report concluded that ‘Not one of the Piltdown finds genuinely came from Piltdown.’ Within months of these latest revelations the last surviving principal protagonists in the Piltdown affair were dead. Arthur Keith died on 7 January, followed by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin on 10 April.
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 036.jpg|150px|Further contributions to the solution of the Piltdown problem, Weiner et al., 1953. © BGS/NERC reproduction.]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 036.jpg|150px|Further contributions to the solution of the Piltdown problem, Weiner et al., 1953. © BGS/NERC reproduction.]]
 
|-
 
|-
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1955
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | 1955
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | ‘A most elaborate and carefully prepared hoax’
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | ‘A most elaborate and carefully prepared hoax’
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Those who had believed in the authenticity of Piltdown Man had been victims of ‘''a most elaborate and carefully prepared hoax’.''. Yet the question remained: who had carried out such an audacious fraud?
+
| style="vertical-align:top;" | Those who had believed in the authenticity of Piltdown Man had been victims of ‘''a most elaborate and carefully prepared hoax’.''; The question remained: who had carried out such an audacious fraud?
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 037.jpg|150px|Discussion on the Piltdown skull, a painting by John Cooke, 1915. Back row, left to right: Frank Barlow, Prof. Grafton Elliot Smith, Charles Dawson, and Dr Arthur Smith Woodward; front row: Dr A. S. Underwood, Prof. Arthur Keith, William Pycraft, and Sir Ray Lankester. © The Geological Society (GSL/POR/19)]]
 
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [[File:Piltdown 037.jpg|150px|Discussion on the Piltdown skull, a painting by John Cooke, 1915. Back row, left to right: Frank Barlow, Prof. Grafton Elliot Smith, Charles Dawson, and Dr Arthur Smith Woodward; front row: Dr A. S. Underwood, Prof. Arthur Keith, William Pycraft, and Sir Ray Lankester. © The Geological Society (GSL/POR/19)]]
 
|}
 
|}
 +
 +
 
== Suspects ==
 
== Suspects ==
  
In the years that followed the uncovering of the forgery, a wearisome succession of names would be added to the list of the ‘accused’. In the order in which they were publicly identified, they are: Charles Dawson, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, W. R. Butterfield, Venus Hargreaves, Grafton Elliot Smith, William J. Sollas, Martin Hinton, Arthur Conan Doyle, Samuel Woodhead, John T. Hewitt, Lewis Abbott, Frank Barlow, Arthur Keith, Chipper the goose (in jest!), Arthur Smith Woodward, and C. P. Chatwin. A few minor names, alluded to but never fully discussed, have been omitted from this list (but see the introduction in the annotated bibliography referenced under "Further reading and detailed bibliography").
+
Presented here in the order in which they were publicly identified, are: Charles Dawson, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, W. R. Butterfield, Venus Hargreaves, Grafton Elliot Smith, William J. Sollas, Martin Hinton, Arthur Conan Doyle, Samuel Woodhead, John T. Hewitt, Lewis Abbott, Frank Barlow, Arthur Keith, Chipper the goose (in jest!), Arthur Smith Woodward, and C. P. Chatwin.
  
 
{|class="wikitable"
 
{|class="wikitable"
Line 388: Line 404:
  
 
On Mike Oldfield’s ‘Tubular Bells’ (1973) he is listed as playing ‘Piltdown Man’ which refers to some unintelligible vocalisation he does on the album.
 
On Mike Oldfield’s ‘Tubular Bells’ (1973) he is listed as playing ‘Piltdown Man’ which refers to some unintelligible vocalisation he does on the album.
 
== Further reading and detailed bibliography ==
 
 
If you want to find out more about Piltdown then the following books would be a good place to start:
 
 
Russell, Miles, ''The Piltdown Man forgery: Case Closed ''(The History Press, 2012)
 
 
Spencer, Frank, ''The Piltdown Papers ''(Oxford University Press, 1990)
 
 
Walsh, John, ''Unravelling Piltdown: The Science Fraud of the Century and Its Solution ''(Random House, 1996)
 
 
Weiner, J S, ''The Piltdown Forgery ''(Fiftieth Anniversary edition, with a new Introduction and Afterword by Chris Stringer, Oxford University Press, 2003)
 
 
For a more detailed study of the whole Piltdown story, BGS Historian David G Bate has compiled a large [http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/507543/ annotated bibliography].
 
  
 
[[Category:British geoscientists]]
 
[[Category:British geoscientists]]

Please note that all contributions to Earthwise may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Earthwise:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

  [] · [[]] · [[|]] · {{}} · · “” ‘’ «» ‹› „“ ‚‘ · ~ | °   · ± × ÷ ² ³ ½ · §
[[Category:]] · [[:File:]] · <code></code> · <syntaxhighlight></syntaxhighlight> · <includeonly></includeonly> · <noinclude></noinclude> · #REDIRECT[[]] · <translate></translate> · <languages/> · ==References== · {{reflist}} · ==Footnote== · {{reflist|group=note}} · <ref group=note> · __notoc__ · {{DEFAULTSORT:}} <div class="someclass noprint"></div> {{clear}} <br>