Piltdown Man

Group portrait by John Cooke, 1915.Back row (from left): F O Barlow, GElliot Smith, Charles Dawson, ArthurSmith Woodward. Front row: A SUnderwood, Arthur Keith, W P Pycraft,and Sir Ray Lankester.

Piltdown ManFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Piltdown Man was apaleoanthropological hoax in which bonefragments were presented as thefossilised remains of a previouslyunknown early human. These fragmentsconsisted of parts of a skull and jawbone,said to have been collected in 1912 froma gravel pit at Piltdown, East Sussex,England. The Latin name Eoanthropusdawsoni ("Dawson's dawn-man", afterthe collector Charles Dawson) was givento the specimen. The significance of thespecimen remained the subject ofcontroversy until it was exposed in 1953as a forgery, consisting of the lowerjawbone of an orangutan deliberatelycombined with the cranium of a fullydeveloped modern human.

The Piltdown hoax is perhaps the mostfamous paleoanthropological hoax ever to have been perpetrated. It is prominentfor two reasons: the attention paid to the issue of human evolution, and the lengthof time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its full exposure asa forgery.

Contents

1 Find1.1 Sheffield Park find

2 Memorial3 Exposure

3.1 Scientific investigation3.2 Identity of the forger

4 Legacy4.1 Early humans4.2 Influence4.3 Early 20th century science

5 Timeline6 See also

Coordinates: 50°59′16″N 0°03′46″E

Piltdown Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piltdo...

1 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

Piltdown Man skull

7 References8 Further reading9 External links

Find

At a meeting of the Geological Society of London on 18 December 1912, CharlesDawson claimed that a workman at the Piltdown gravel pit had given him afragment of the skull four years earlier. According to Dawson, workmen at the sitediscovered the skull shortly before his visit and broke it up in the belief that it wasa fossilised coconut. Revisiting the site on several occasions, Dawson foundfurther fragments of the skull and took them to Arthur Smith Woodward, keeperof the geological department at the British Museum. Greatly interested by thefinds, Woodward accompanied Dawson to the site. Though the two workedtogether between June and September 1912, Dawson alone recovered more skullfragments and half of the lower jaw bone.[1][2]

The skull unearthed in 1908 was the only finddiscovered in situ, with most of the other piecesfound in the gravel pits' spoil heaps.

At the same meeting, Woodward announced that areconstruction of the fragments indicated that theskull was in many ways similar to that of a modernhuman, except for the occiput (the part of the skullthat sits on the spinal column) and for brain size,which was about two-thirds that of a modernhuman. He went on to indicate that save for thepresence of two human-like molar teeth, the jawbone found would be indistinguishable from that ofa modern, young chimpanzee. From the British Museum's reconstruction of theskull, Woodward proposed that Piltdown man represented an evolutionary missinglink between apes and humans, since the combination of a human-like craniumwith an ape-like jaw tended to support the notion then prevailing in England thathuman evolution began with the brain.

Almost from the outset, Woodward's reconstruction of the Piltdown fragmentswas strongly challenged. At the Royal College of Surgeons copies of the samefragments used by the British Museum in their reconstruction were used toproduce an entirely different model, one that in brain size and other featuresresembled a modern human. This reconstruction, by Prof. (later Sir) Arthur Keith,was called Homo piltdownensis in reflection of its more human appearance.[3]

Woodward's reconstruction included apelike canine teeth, which was itself


2 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

controversial. In August 1913, Woodward, Dawson and Pierre Teilhard deChardin, a Jesuit priest and friend of Dawson who had trained as a paleontologistand geologist, began a systematic search of the spoil heaps specifically to find themissing canines. Teilhard soon found a canine that, according to Woodward, fittedthe jaw perfectly. A few days later Teilhard moved to France and took no furtherpart in the discoveries. Noting that the tooth "corresponds exactly with that of anape",[4] Woodward expected the find to end any dispute over his reconstruction ofthe skull. However, Keith attacked the find. Keith pointed out that human molarsare the result of side to side movement when chewing. The canine in the Piltdownjaw was impossible as it prevented side to side movement. To explain the wear onthe molar teeth, the canine could not have been any higher than the molars.Grafton Elliot Smith, a fellow anthropologist, sided with Woodward, and at thenext Royal Society meeting claimed that Keith's opposition was motivated entirelyby ambition. Keith later recalled, "Such was the end of our long friendship."[5]

As early as 1913, David Waterston of King's College London published in Naturehis conclusion that the sample consisted of an ape mandible and human skull.[6]

Likewise, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule concluded the same thing in1915. A third opinion from American zoologist Gerrit Smith Miller concludedPiltdown's jaw came from a fossil ape. In 1923, Franz Weidenreich examined theremains and correctly reported that they consisted of a modern human craniumand an orangutan jaw with filed-down teeth.[7]

Sheffield Park find

In 1915, Dawson claimed to have found three fragments of a second skull(Piltdown II) at a new site about two miles away from the original finds.[1]

Woodward attempted several times to elicit the location from Dawson but wasunsuccessful. So far as is known, the site was never identified and the findsappear largely undocumented. Woodward did not present the new finds to theSociety until five months after Dawson's death in August 1916 and deliberatelyimplied that he knew where they had been found. In 1921, Henry FairfieldOsborn, President of the American Museum of Natural History, examined thePiltdown and Sheffield Park finds and declared that the jaw and skull belongedtogether "without question" and that the Sheffield Park fragments "were exactlythose which we should have selected to confirm the comparison with the originaltype."[5]

The Sheffield Park finds were taken as proof of the authenticity of the PiltdownMan; it may have been chance that brought an ape's jaw and a human skulltogether, but the odds of it happening twice were slim. Even Keith conceded tothis new evidence, though he still harbored personal doubts.[8]

Memorial


3 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

The Piltdown Man memorialstone.

On 23 July 1938, at Barkham Manor, Piltdown, SirArthur Keith unveiled a memorial to mark the sitewhere Piltdown Man was discovered by CharlesDawson. Sir Arthur finished his speech saying:

So long as man is interested in his long pasthistory, in the vicissitudes which our earlyforerunners passed through, and the varyingfare which overtook them, the name ofCharles Dawson is certain of remembrance.We do well to link his name to thispicturesque corner of Sussex—the scene ofhis discovery. I have now the honour ofunveiling this monolith dedicated to hismemory.[9]

The inscription on the memorial stone reads:

Here in the old river gravel Mr CharlesDawson, FSA found the fossil skull of PiltdownMan, 1912–1913, The discovery wasdescribed by Mr Charles Dawson and SirArthur Smith Woodward, Quarterly Journal ofthe Geological Society, 1913–15.

Exposure

Scientific investigation

From the outset, some scientists expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find(see above).

G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 that "deliberate malice could hardlyhave been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking thefossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the partstogether."[10] In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientistsincreasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with thepath of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere.[1]

Skeptical scientists only increased in number as more fossils were found.[citation needed]

In November 1953, Time published evidence gathered variously by Kenneth PageOakley, Sir Wilfrid Edward Le Gros Clark and Joseph Weiner proving that thePiltdown Man was a forgery[11] and demonstrating that the fossil was a compositeof three distinct species. It consisted of a human skull of medieval age, the


4 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

500-year-old lower jaw of a Sarawak orangutan and chimpanzee fossil teeth.Someone had created the appearance of age by staining the bones with an ironsolution and chromic acid. Microscopic examination revealed file-marks on theteeth, and it was deduced from this that someone had modified the teeth to ashape more suited to a human diet.

The Piltdown man hoax succeeded so well because, at the time of its discovery,the scientific establishment believed that the large modern brain preceded themodern omnivorous diet, and the forgery provided exactly that evidence. It hasalso been thought that nationalism and cultural prejudice played a role in theless-than-critical acceptance of the fossil as genuine by some British scientists.[6]

It satisfied European expectations that the earliest humans would be found inEurasia, and the British, it has been claimed,[6] also wanted a first Briton to setagainst fossil hominids found elsewhere in Europe, including France andGermany.

Identity of the forger

The identity of the Piltdown forger remains unknown, but suspects have includedDawson, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Arthur Keith, Martin A. C. Hinton, Horace deVere Cole and Arthur Conan Doyle.[12][13]

Teilhard had travelled to regions of Africa where one of the anomalous findsoriginated, and resided in the Wealden area from the date of the earliest finds.Hinton left a trunk in storage at the Natural History Museum in London that in1970 was found to contain animal bones and teeth carved and stained in amanner similar to the carving and staining on the Piltdown finds. Phillip Tobiasimplicated Arthur Keith by detailing the history of the investigation of the hoax,dismissing other theories, and listing inconsistencies in Keith's statements andactions.[14] Other investigations suggest the hoax involved accomplices ratherthan a single forger.[15]

The focus on Charles Dawson as the main forger is supported by the accumulationof evidence regarding other archaeological hoaxes he perpetrated in the decadeor two prior to the Piltdown discovery. Archaeologist Miles Russell ofBournemouth University analyzed Dawson's antiquarian collection anddetermined at least 38 were fakes.[16][17] Among these were the teeth of areptile/mammal hybrid, Plagiaulax dawsoni, "found" in 1891 (and whose teeth hadbeen filed down in the same way that the teeth of Piltdown man would be some 20years later), the so-called "shadow figures" on the walls of Hastings Castle, aunique hafted stone axe, the Bexhill boat (a hybrid seafaring vessel), the Pevenseybricks (allegedly the latest datable "finds" from Roman Britain), the contents ofthe Lavant Caves (a fraudulent "flint mine"), the Beauport Park "Roman" statuette(a hybrid iron object), the Bulverhythe Hammer (shaped with an iron knife in thesame way as the Piltdown elephant bone implement would later be), a fraudulent


5 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

A replica of the Piltdown manskull.

"Chinese" bronze vase, the Brighton "Toad in the Hole" (a toad entombed within aflint nodule), the English Channel sea serpent, the Uckfield Horseshoe (anotherhybrid iron object) and the Lewes Prick Spur. Of his antiquarian publications,most demonstrate evidence of plagiarism or at least naive referencing. Russellwrote: "Piltdown was not a 'one-off' hoax, more the culmination of a life'swork."[18] In addition, Harry Morris, an acquaintance of Dawson, had come intopossession of one of the flints obtained by Dawson at the Piltdown gravel pit. Hesuspected that it had been artificially aged—"stained by C. Dawson with intent todefraud." He remained deeply suspicious of Dawson for many years to come,though he never sought to discredit him publicly.[19]

Legacy

Early humans

In 1912, the majority of the scientific communitybelieved the Piltdown man was the “missing link”between apes and humans. However, over time thePiltdown man lost its validity, as other discoveriessuch as Taung Child and Peking Man were found.R. W. Ehrich and G. M. Henderson note, “To thosewho are not completely disillusioned by the workof their predecessors, the disqualification of thePiltdown skull changes little in the broadevolutionary pattern. The validity of the specimenhas always been questioned.”[20] Eventually,during the 1940s and 1950s, more advanceddating technologies, such as the fluorineabsorption test, proved scientifically that this skullwas actually a fraud.

Influence

The Piltdown man fraud significantly affected early research on humanevolution.[21] Notably, it led scientists down a blind alley in the belief that thehuman brain expanded in size before the jaw adapted to new types of food.Discoveries of Australopithecine fossils such as the Taung child found byRaymond Dart during the 1920s in South Africa were ignored due to the supportfor Piltdown man as "the missing link", and the reconstruction of human evolutionwas confused for decades. The examination and debate over Piltdown man causeda vast expenditure of time and effort on the fossil, with an estimated 250+ paperswritten on the topic.

The fossil was introduced as evidence by Clarence Darrow in defense of John


6 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

Scopes during the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial. Darrow died in 1938, fifteen yearsbefore Piltdown Man was exposed as a fraud.

The hoax is often cited (along with Nebraska Man) by creationists as an exampleof the dishonesty of paleontologists that study human evolution, despite the factthat scientists themselves had exposed the hoax.[22][23]

In November 2003, the Natural History Museum in London held an exhibition tomark the 50th anniversary of its exposure.[24]

Early 20th century science

The Piltdown case is an example of how racial, nationalist and gendereddiscourses shaped some science at the time. Piltdown's semi-human features wereexplained by reference to non-white ethnicities whom many Europeans of thattime considered a lower form of human.[25] The influence of nationalism is clearin the differing interpretations of the find: whilst the majority of British scientistsaccepted the discovery as "the Earliest Englishman",[26] European and Americanscientists were considerably more sceptical, and several suggested at the timethat the skull and jaw were from two different creatures and had beenaccidentally mixed up.[25] Regarding gender, the find was discussed as a male,despite Woodward suggesting that the specimen discovered was a female. Theonly exception to this was in coverage by the Daily Express newspaper, whichreferred to the discovery as a woman, but only to use it to mock the Suffragettemovement of the time, of which the Express was highly critical.[27]

Timeline

1908: Dawson claims discovery of first Piltdown fragments.1912 February: Dawson contacts Woodward about first skull fragments.1912 June: Dawson, Woodward, and Teilhard form digging team.1912 June: Team finds elephant molar, skull fragment.1912 June: Right parietal skull bones and the jaw bone discovered.1912 November: News breaks in the popular press.1912 December: Official presentation of Piltdown man.1913: David Waterston concludes the sample to be an ape mandible and ahuman skull.1914: Talgai skull (Australia) found, considered, at the time, to confirmPiltdown.1915: Marcellin Boule concludes the sample to be an ape mandible and ahuman skull. Gerrit Smith Miller concludes the jaw is from a fossil ape.1923: Franz Weidenreich reports the remains consist of a modern humancranium and orang utan jaw with filed-down teeth.


7 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

1925: Edmonds reports Piltdown geology error. Report ignored.1943: Fluorine content test is first proposed.1948: The Earliest Englishman by Woodward is published (posthumously).1949: Fluorine content test establishes Piltdown man as relatively recent.1953: Weiner, Le Gros Clark, and Oakley expose the hoax.2003: Full nature of Charles Dawson's career in fakes is exposed.

See also

ArchaeoraptorBatavus genuinusBone Wars – Similar rivalry and hoaxes over dinosaur bones in the late 19thcentury.Cardiff GiantThe Piltdown Men – An American band whose name was inspired by thehoax.Calaveras Skull

References

^ a b c Lewin, Roger (1987), Bones ofContention (http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_expose/chain_of_fraud.html),ISBN 0-671-52688-X

1.

^ Russell, Miles (2003), Piltdown Man:The Secret Life of Charles Dawson,Tempus, Stroud, pp. 157–71

2.

^ Keith, A. (1914) "The Significance ofthe Skull at Piltdown", Bedrock 2435:453.

3.

^ Woodward, A. Smith (1913), "Noteon the Piltdown Man (EoanthropusDawsoni)" (http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_report_finds/note_pilt_man.html), The GeologicalMagazine 10 (10): 433,doi:10.1017/S0016756800127426(http://dx.doi.org/10.1017%2FS0016756800127426)

4.

^ a b Walsh, John E. (1996).Unraveling Piltdown: The ScienceFraud of the Century and its Solution.New York: Random House. ISBN0-679-44444-0.

5.

^ a b c Gould, Stephen J. (1980), ThePanda's Thumb, W. W. Norton and Co.,pp. 108–124, ISBN 0-393-01380-4

6.

^ MacRitchie, Finlay (2011), ScientificResearch as a Career(http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Ja351EkKUDsC&pg=PA30),CRC Press, p. 30, ISBN 1439869650

7.

^ Craddock, Paul (2012), ScientificInvestigation of Copies, Fakes andForgeries (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xYHjpNjimsoC&pg=PT615),CRC Press, ISBN 1136436014

8.

^ The Piltdown Man Discovery(http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_report_finds/pilt_man_discover.html), Nature, July30, 1938

9.


8 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

^ Miller, Gerrit S. (November 24,1915), "The Jaw of the Piltdown Man",Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections65 (12): 1

10.

^ End as a Man- Time Magazine 30Nov 1953 (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,823171,00.html) retrieved 11November 2010

11.

^ Lukas, Mary (May 1981). "Teilhardand the Piltdown 'Hoax'"(http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_prim_suspects/teilhard_de_chardin/Chardin_defend/teilhardandpilthoax(lukas).html).America.

12.

^ Bartlett, Kate (17 February 2011)."Piltdown Man: Britain's GreatestHoax" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml). BBC History.

13.

^ Phillip V. Tobias. 1992. Piltdown: AnAppraisal of the Case against SirArthur Keith. Current Anthropology,Vol. 33, No. 3 (Jun., 1992), pp. 243–293with Comments and Reply by Peter J.Bowler, Andrew T. Chamberlain,ChristopherChippindale, Robin W.Dennell, F. G. Fedele, Paul Graves,Caroline Grigson, G.AinsworthHarrison, Francis B.Harrold, Kenneth A. R. Kennedy,Martin K. Nickels, NicolasRolland,Curtis Runnels, FrankSpencer, C. B. Stringer, N. C. Tappen,Bruce G. Trigger, SherwoodWashburnand R. V. S. Wright.[1](http://www.clarku.edu/~PILTDOWN/map_prim_suspects/KEITH/Keith_prosecution/apprais_Keith.html)

14.

^ Weiner, J. S. (29 January 2004), ThePiltdown Forgery, Oxford UniversityPress, pp. 190–197,ISBN 0-19-860780-6

15.

^ Russell, Miles (2003), Piltdown Man:The Secret Life of Charles Dawson,Tempus

16.

^ Russell, Miles (2012), The PiltdownMan Hoax: Case Closed, The HistoryPress

17.

^ Russell, Miles (23 November 2003)."Charles Dawson: 'The Piltdownfaker' " (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3285163.stm).BBC News. Retrieved 16 December2010.

18.

^ Weiner, The Piltdown Forgery, pp.140–145.

19.

^ "Culture area", in InternationalEncyclopedia of the Social Sciences,vol. 3, pp. 563–568. (New York:Macmillan/The Free Press).

20.

^ Natural History Museum: "PiltdownMan—the greatest hoax in the historyof science?" (http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/the-scientific-process/piltdown-man-hoax/)

21.

^ Harter, Richard (1997). "CreationistArguments: Piltdown Man"(http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown.html). Retrieved 29August 2007.

22.

^ Caroll, Robert Todd (1996)."Piltdown Hoax"(http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_expose/piltdown_hoax.html).Retrieved 29 August 2007.

23.

^ "The Natural History MuseumAnnual Review 2003/2004"(http://web.archive.org/web/20051105143956/http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/corporate-information/annual-reports/report/report2004/text/ouryear.html).Archived from the original(http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/corporate-information/annual-reports/report/report2004/text/ouryear.html) on 2005-11-05.Retrieved 17 November 2007.

24.


9 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

^ a b Goulden, M. (May 2009)."Boundary-work and the human–animal binary: Piltdown man, scienceand the media". Public Understandingof Science 18 (3): 275–291.doi:10.1177/0963662507081239(http://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F0963662507081239).

25. ^ Woodward, A. Smith (1948), TheEarliest Englishman(http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_report_finds/earliest_english.html), Thinker'sLibrary 127, London: Watts & Co.

26.

^ Goulden, M. (December 2007)."Bringing Bones to Life: How ScienceMade Piltdown Man Human". Scienceas Culture 16 (4): 333–357.doi:10.1080/09505430701706699(http://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F09505430701706699).

27.

Further reading

The Times, 21 November 1953; 23 November 1953Blinderman, Charles (1986), The Piltdown Inquest, Buffalo, New York:Prometheus Books, ISBN 0-87975-359-5.Feder, Kenneth L. (2008), Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science andPseudoscience in Archaeology (6th ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 73–101,ISBN 0-07-340529-9.Millar, Ronald (1972), The Piltdown Men, New York: Ballantine Books,ISBN 0-575-00536-X, OCLC 2009318 (//www.worldcat.org/oclc/2009318).Russell, Miles (2003), Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson &the World's Greatest Archaeological Hoax, Stroud, Gloucestershire: TempusPublishing, ISBN 0-7524-2572-2.Russell, Miles (2012), The Piltdown Man Hoax: Case Closed, Stroud,Gloucestershire: History Press, ISBN 0-7524-8774-4.Shreeve, James (1996), The Neanderthal Enigma: Solving the Mystery ofModern Human Origins, New York: HarperCollins, ISBN 0-380-72881-8.Spencer, Frank (1990), Piltdown: A Scientific Forgery, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, ISBN 0-19-858522-5.Walsh, John E. (1996), Unraveling Piltdown: The Science Fraud of theCentury and Its Solution, New York: Random House, ISBN 0-679-44444-0.Weiner, Joseph S. (2003), The Piltdown Forgery: the classic account of themost famous and successful hoax in science, Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, ISBN 0-19-860780-6.Woodward, A. Smith (1948), The Earliest Englishman (http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_report_finds/earliest_english.html), Thinker's Library 127,London: Watts & Co.Roberts, Noel Keith (2000), From Piltdown Man to Point Omega: theevolutionary theory of Teilhard de Chardin (New York: Peter Lang)Steven A. Grasse (http://evilempirebook.com), The Evil Empire: 101 Ways


10 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

That England Ruined the World (Quirk Books, April 2007), The Evil Empire,Google Books (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0tkjhI2JiTwC&dq=%22The+Evil+Empire:+101+Ways+That+England+Ruined+The+World%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=W9PgSYunF5aqjAeBoLnUDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4)

External links

"Piltdown Man: Case Closed" (http://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/caah/landscapeandtownscapearchaeology/piltdown_man_a.html) atBournemouth University"Charles Dawson Piltdown Faker" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3285163.stm) BBC NewsPiltdown Man documentary (http://www.historiek.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=51&limit=1&limitstart=1) Discovery ChannelPiltdown Man (http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/life/human-origins/piltdown-man/index.html) at the Natural History Museum, LondonThe Piltdown Plot (http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/) at Clark UniversityArchæological Forgeries (http://www.sniggle.net/archforg.php)The Unmasking of Piltdown Man (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/03/piltdown_man/html/default.stm) BBCFossil fools: Return to Piltdown (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3264025.stm) BBCThe Boldest Hoax (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/hoax/) (about PiltdownMan case) PBS NOVASarah Lyell, "Piltdown Man Hoaxer: Missing Link is Found"(http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_prim_suspects/HINTON/Hinton_Prosecution/pilt_hoax_found.html), The New York Times, 25 May1996. The case for Martin A. C. Hinton as the hoaxer.An annotated bibliography of the Piltdown Man forgery, 1953–2005(http://www.palarch.nl/wp-content/turrittin_th_an_annotated_bibliography_of_the_piltdown_man_forgery_1953_2005_palarchs_journal_of_archaeology_of_northwest_europe_1_1_2006.pdf)by Tom Turrittin.Web pages and timeline about the Piltdown forgery hosted by the BritishGeological Survey (http://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/geologyOfBritain/archives/piltdownMan/home.html)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piltdown_Man&oldid=603418015"Categories: Archaeology of the United Kingdom History of East Sussex


11 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

Academic scandals 1912 in science Hoaxes in scienceHoaxes in the United Kingdom Archaeological forgeries Scientific misconduct20th-century hoaxes

This page was last modified on 9 April 2014 at 08:13.Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlikeLicense; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to theTerms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of theWikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.


12 of 12 2014-04-14 11:19

Piltdown Man

Documents