What do you think?
Rate this book
Piltdown Forgery
On 21 November 1953, one of the most fascinating puzzles in science was finally solved. Three scientists - including the author of this book, Joseph Weiner - described their investigations into the important fossilized human remains found at Piltdown in Sussex in the early 1900s. Their conclusion was the remains, and the accompanying materials that supposedly verified them as ancient fossils, had been faked.
214 pages, Paperback
First published December 31, 1980
4 people are currently reading
52 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
January 3, 2016
Of the three books I've read about Piltdown Man, this, the first written, is also the best. It was written by one of the three men who actually uncovered the hoax, and unlike Ronald Millar's The Piltdown Men and Frank Spencer's Piltdown: A Scientific Forgery, it focuses first and extensively on the mechanics of the Piltdown forgery, and only then proceeds to the detective's whodunnit. Thus, by the time Weiner gets to talking about means, motive, and opportunity for the various suspects, he's already built a fairly clear picture of the perpetrator, based on the actual evidence of what the forger did (and, just as important, when he did it). And thus he convinces me that Charles Dawson hoaxed Arthur Smith Woodward and the paleontological establishment. (Chris Stringer's afterword, with the benefit of another fifty years of hindsight, makes it clear that if Dawson was the Piltdown forger, his actions fit into a pattern evident in the rest of his career--which cannot be said about any of the other suspects.) Possibly Weiner's best point is that (although he doesn't put it quite like this) Dawson, aside from being the only person who could control what was found at the two Piltdown sites, is the only person who benefitted from the forgery. For every other suspect, the motive is embarrassing Smith Woodward, or Dawson, or another scientist, or British paleontology in general--and in every one of those cases, you end up having to ask, where was their pay-off? Why did they wait forty years for three scientists to quite independently do the reveal for them? But Dawson died in 1916--after which, as Weiner also points out, no further Piltdown discoveries were made, despite the fact that Smith Woodward continued excavations for the rest of his life--and Dawson got acclaim and respect from the London establishment. Not only does Dawson as forger apply Occam's Razor to the Gordian Knot (if you'll pardon the free mixing of metaphors), but it is also the only scenario in which the forger got what he wanted through his own actions.
There isn't any proof of Dawson's guilt (which is another fascinating thing about Piltdown: all accusations are hypotheses, because we still don't know), but Weiner convinced me. At the very least, it's the most plausible theory, and the most richly and firmly supported, that I've encountered.
There isn't any proof of Dawson's guilt (which is another fascinating thing about Piltdown: all accusations are hypotheses, because we still don't know), but Weiner convinced me. At the very least, it's the most plausible theory, and the most richly and firmly supported, that I've encountered.
June 14, 2010
Pretty cool history and background of the anthropology world in England in the 1910's - 1920's. Amazing that it took almost four decades to completely uncover the forgery. The white elephant in the room is that Piltdown Man was believed to be real until the results of true tests came to light. I wouldn't recommend it to the casual reader.
March 24, 2011
It´s not a realy science book. You can read it to fullfill the curiusity about piltdown and in exange have a very nice moment of crime novel when you´re trying to discover the real forger. All people envolved in the science matter should read it and see how easy, in today´s times too, is to deceive someone who want´s to be delude.
January 14, 2018
Read as part of the suggested pre-reading for my forthcoming module on 'Fakes and Forgeries' for the MSc in forensics I'm doing.
This is a 2003 reprint of the 1955 book by one of the researchers who uncovered the Piltdown Man hoax, adding a short contemporary introduction and afterword. After recounting the history of the Piltdown finds and of Charles Dawson, solicitor and amateur fossil-hunter, Weiner recounts how he and others coming into paleobiology in the late 1940s were increasingly confused and doubtful about 'Eoanthropus dawsoni' both in terms of how it fitted into the fossil record and the circumstances in which it had been found. He and his colleagues were able to apply then-new scientific techniques to quickly show that the skull fragments and jawbone were of differing, but both recent, ages, and with the authenticity of the specimen now in grave doubt the Natural History museum permitted more aggressive and extensive tests that quickly proved it to be a modern forgery.
Having set out how the hoax was uncovered, Weiner then spends much of the rest of the book setting out his evidence as to who of those involved might or might not have been culpable, but at the last minute draws back from firmly accusing Dawson of being the culprit. As a lawyer, I found it odd - it was like reading a lengthy, detailed and damning closing submission that concluded by inviting the jury to come to its own conclusions. Weiner can hardly have been concerned about being sued for libel; not only was the evidence against Dawson overwhelming, but he had by this time been dead for nearly 40 years. I suspect that, having exposed the greatest hoax in the history of palaeontology, Weiner could not quite bring himself to administer the final kick; perhaps he could not quite satisfy himself that this was not a joke that had spiralled out of control, or the self-deluding acts of a 'gentleman scientist' desperate for professional recognition.
The modern afterword notes this reluctance to come to a final conclusion, and writing nearly half a century further on Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum has fewer qualms in pointing to Dawson as the perpetrator, although he quite fairly sums up the theories since 1955 that pointed fingers at everyone from Pierre Teilhard de Chardin to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. He ends by noting that further tests would still help answer the question of whether Dawson acted alone or as part of a wider group; since then, such tests have been carried out, and in 2016 Isabelle De Groote published results showing that a single hoaxer had almost certainly prepared all the Piltdown 'finds', thus making it clear that Dawson was behind it all (see http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.or...)
If I give this 4/5, it's because the first-person narrative does slightly obscure the wider picture; a more objective narrative might explain better why Weiner and his colleagues followed the lines of research they did. The book also sets out the position in 1955, and although the afterword gives an update, it's inevitably very summarised. However, this stands as an excellent account by someone directly involved of how the scientific fraud of the century was perpetrated and exposed. It also serves as a warning of the dangers of wishful thinking and confirmation bias; the idea in 1912 that the 'Dawn Man' had lived in what would become England was very attractive in the culture of the time, and Dawson's death in 1916 and the disruption of WW1 meant that few had the time or inclination to investigate the 'finds' more closely. As for Dawson, as a lawyer he must have encountered no shortage of clients all too willing to lie to themselves if it served their interests; perhaps he would have been surprised how long it was before his own deceit was exposed.
This is a 2003 reprint of the 1955 book by one of the researchers who uncovered the Piltdown Man hoax, adding a short contemporary introduction and afterword. After recounting the history of the Piltdown finds and of Charles Dawson, solicitor and amateur fossil-hunter, Weiner recounts how he and others coming into paleobiology in the late 1940s were increasingly confused and doubtful about 'Eoanthropus dawsoni' both in terms of how it fitted into the fossil record and the circumstances in which it had been found. He and his colleagues were able to apply then-new scientific techniques to quickly show that the skull fragments and jawbone were of differing, but both recent, ages, and with the authenticity of the specimen now in grave doubt the Natural History museum permitted more aggressive and extensive tests that quickly proved it to be a modern forgery.
Having set out how the hoax was uncovered, Weiner then spends much of the rest of the book setting out his evidence as to who of those involved might or might not have been culpable, but at the last minute draws back from firmly accusing Dawson of being the culprit. As a lawyer, I found it odd - it was like reading a lengthy, detailed and damning closing submission that concluded by inviting the jury to come to its own conclusions. Weiner can hardly have been concerned about being sued for libel; not only was the evidence against Dawson overwhelming, but he had by this time been dead for nearly 40 years. I suspect that, having exposed the greatest hoax in the history of palaeontology, Weiner could not quite bring himself to administer the final kick; perhaps he could not quite satisfy himself that this was not a joke that had spiralled out of control, or the self-deluding acts of a 'gentleman scientist' desperate for professional recognition.
The modern afterword notes this reluctance to come to a final conclusion, and writing nearly half a century further on Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum has fewer qualms in pointing to Dawson as the perpetrator, although he quite fairly sums up the theories since 1955 that pointed fingers at everyone from Pierre Teilhard de Chardin to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. He ends by noting that further tests would still help answer the question of whether Dawson acted alone or as part of a wider group; since then, such tests have been carried out, and in 2016 Isabelle De Groote published results showing that a single hoaxer had almost certainly prepared all the Piltdown 'finds', thus making it clear that Dawson was behind it all (see http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.or...)
If I give this 4/5, it's because the first-person narrative does slightly obscure the wider picture; a more objective narrative might explain better why Weiner and his colleagues followed the lines of research they did. The book also sets out the position in 1955, and although the afterword gives an update, it's inevitably very summarised. However, this stands as an excellent account by someone directly involved of how the scientific fraud of the century was perpetrated and exposed. It also serves as a warning of the dangers of wishful thinking and confirmation bias; the idea in 1912 that the 'Dawn Man' had lived in what would become England was very attractive in the culture of the time, and Dawson's death in 1916 and the disruption of WW1 meant that few had the time or inclination to investigate the 'finds' more closely. As for Dawson, as a lawyer he must have encountered no shortage of clients all too willing to lie to themselves if it served their interests; perhaps he would have been surprised how long it was before his own deceit was exposed.
October 27, 2024
One of several books about Piltdown Man. This one is focussed on the scientific evidence and less than a story than my favourite which is "Unravelling Piltdown". Whilst the truth is still uncertain both books lead to the same conclusion of who the main hoaxer was.
July 19, 2020
Answered a lot of my questions, but I often felt I was reading "through mud".
March 12, 2016
A fascinating and forensic examination of the legendary hoax that was finally uncovered after longer than you think. This is basically the report that blew the lid off the outlier "Missing Link" between apes and man. Originally published in the early 1950's this investigation by J.S. Weiner has a new introduction and afterword that brings us right up to date.
Following the discovery in the early 20th century of Java Man and Heidelberg Man (and the consequent fame of their finders) there was a certain desperation among anthropologists to further uncover the family tree of Homo sapiens. What better way to cement one's place in history (especially if one felt overlooked and undervalued, and had a certain ruthless but poor scientific technique accompanied by a tendency to plagiarise others' work) than to find an even older ancestor... in Sussex.
So, paint some old bits of fossilised human skull that look a bit odd and chuck them in gravel pit with a piece of orang utan mandible, some hippo teeth and an elephant leg bone roughly carved into a club and sit back for a bit and then discover them yourself. Next, persuade your mates at the National History Museum that they are genuine by dint of the forensic techniques of 1912 and bolster this with further discoveries down the road of another specimen and the world will beat a path to your door. Even better, die a couple of years later with a saintly reputation aux Jimmy Savile.
The subsequent findings of more likely ancestors in Africa left Piltdown Man as an embarrassing anomaly that needed to be expunged from the fossil record.
The application of more modern (1950's) scientific method soon uncovered the extent and sheer brazenness of the fraud. This was by no means the first or last time that such obvious nonsense has been taken at face value (see The Hitler Diaries) but one does wonder if successful hoaxes are still out there just waiting for someone to say, "Hold on a minute..."
Following the discovery in the early 20th century of Java Man and Heidelberg Man (and the consequent fame of their finders) there was a certain desperation among anthropologists to further uncover the family tree of Homo sapiens. What better way to cement one's place in history (especially if one felt overlooked and undervalued, and had a certain ruthless but poor scientific technique accompanied by a tendency to plagiarise others' work) than to find an even older ancestor... in Sussex.
So, paint some old bits of fossilised human skull that look a bit odd and chuck them in gravel pit with a piece of orang utan mandible, some hippo teeth and an elephant leg bone roughly carved into a club and sit back for a bit and then discover them yourself. Next, persuade your mates at the National History Museum that they are genuine by dint of the forensic techniques of 1912 and bolster this with further discoveries down the road of another specimen and the world will beat a path to your door. Even better, die a couple of years later with a saintly reputation aux Jimmy Savile.
The subsequent findings of more likely ancestors in Africa left Piltdown Man as an embarrassing anomaly that needed to be expunged from the fossil record.
The application of more modern (1950's) scientific method soon uncovered the extent and sheer brazenness of the fraud. This was by no means the first or last time that such obvious nonsense has been taken at face value (see The Hitler Diaries) but one does wonder if successful hoaxes are still out there just waiting for someone to say, "Hold on a minute..."
September 19, 2015
This is the 4th or 5th time I've read the book, describing the most embarrassing episode in my profession. The "Piltdown Man" of England, "discovered" at various times between about 1908 and 1915, by 1955 became the "Piltdown Forgery." Weiner is one of the scientists who actually uncovered the hoax/forgery and wrote a pretty readable book. Weiner describes in great detail how the hoax was first suspected (by many), covered up by the power brokers of English science, then exposed using methods developed in the 1940's, including refined fluorine dating, carbon dating and various chemical tests finally put to the fossils and accompanying artefacts. It is a detective story, a forensic-based detective story meticulously described. I used the book in several of my "Human Discovery" classes. More has been uncovered since the book was written but this covers the basics and the original exposure, In true English fashion, Weiner does not directly accuse Charles Dawson, of deceit, but makes a very good circumstantial case, including use of a phantom Mr Hyde to match Dawson's Dr. Jekyll. A good scientific mystery, and a real one!!
December 4, 2008
The New Yorker said it's got good "racionation", the best since The Gold Bug. I feel like it's a really long, unorganized Wikipedia article. Probably most interesting to the people who were fooled by it.
June 22, 2017
I was fascinated by the twists and turns of this. I remember it being mentioned in class, but I feel it deserved more attention as a topic in any introductory Physical Anthropology course. It has valuable lessons about the field.
July 21, 2010
Fantastic. I can't believe the public was fooled for so long.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews