Editing Piltdown Man (section)

===Identity of the forger===
The identity of the Piltdown forger remains unknown, but suspects have included Dawson, [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]], [[Arthur Keith]], [[Martin Hinton|Martin A. C. Hinton]], [[Horace de Vere Cole]] and [[Arthur Conan Doyle]].<ref>Lukas, Mary (May 1981). [http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_prim_suspects/teilhard_de_chardin/Chardin_defend/teilhardandpilthoax(lukas).html "Teilhard and the Piltdown 'Hoax'"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120614033556/http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_prim_suspects/Teilhard_de_Chardin/Chardin_defend/teilhardandpilthoax(lukas).html |date=14 June 2012 }}. ''America''.</ref><ref>Bartlett, Kate (17 February 2011). [https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml "Piltdown Man: Britain's Greatest Hoax"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121112061657/http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml |date=12 November 2012 }}. BBC History.</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Study reveals culprit behind Piltdown Man, one of science's most famous hoaxes |url=https://www.science.org/content/article/study-reveals-culprit-behind-piltdown-man-one-science-s-most-famous-hoaxes#:~:text=The%20likeliest%20hand,De%20Groote%20says |access-date=2024-12-09 |website=www.science.org |language=en|date=9 August 2016|first=Michael
|last=Price|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240928122403/https://www.science.org/content/article/study-reveals-culprit-behind-piltdown-man-one-science-s-most-famous-hoaxes#:~:text=The%20likeliest%20hand,De%20Groote%20says|archive-date=28 September 2024|url-status=live|quote=“It now appears that the chemical data supports the abundant circumstantial evidence that Dawson was the brains behind the hoax,” says geologist Stephen Donovan of the Naturalis Biodiversity Institute in Leiden, the Netherlands, who did not participate in the current study. Dawson was able to fool the experts of the day by employing the same trick used by successful con artists since time immemorial: He showed them what they wanted to see.
}}</ref>

[[File:Toad in a hole - Booth Museum Brighton.jpg|thumb|Dawson's "Toad in the Hole". [[Booth Museum of Natural History]], Brighton]]
The focus on Dawson as the main forger is supported by the accumulation of evidence regarding other archaeological hoaxes he perpetrated in the decade or two before the Piltdown discovery. The archaeologist [[Miles Russell]] of [[Bournemouth University]] analysed Dawson's antiquarian collection, and determined that at least 38 of his specimens were fakes.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson |last=Russell |first=Miles |publisher=Tempus |year=2003 |location=Stroud}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=The Piltdown Man Hoax: Case Closed |last=Russell |first=Miles |publisher=The History Press |year=2012 |location=Stroud}}</ref> Among these were the teeth of a [[multituberculata|multituberculate]] mammal, ''[[Plagiaulax]] dawsoni'', "found" in 1891 (and whose teeth had been filed down in the same way that the teeth of Piltdown Man were to be some 20 years later); the so-called "shadow figures" on the walls of [[Hastings Castle]]; a unique hafted stone axe; the [[Bexhill-on-Sea|Bexhill]] boat (a hybrid seafaring vessel); the [[Pevensey]] bricks (allegedly the latest datable "finds" from Roman Britain); the contents of the [[Lavant, West Sussex|Lavant Caves]] (a fraudulent "flint mine"); the [[Beauport Park]] "Roman" statuette (a hybrid iron object); the [[Bulverhythe]] Hammer (shaped with an iron knife in the same way as the Piltdown elephant bone implement would later be); a fraudulent "Chinese" bronze vase; the [[Brighton]] "Toad in the Hole" (a [[Living entombed animal |toad entombed]] within a flint nodule); the English Channel sea serpent; the [[Uckfield]] Horseshoe (another hybrid iron object) and the [[Lewes]] Prick Spur. Of his antiquarian publications, most demonstrate evidence of plagiarism or at least naive referencing. Russell wrote: "Piltdown was not a 'one-off' hoax, more the culmination of a life's work."<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3285163.stm |title=Charles Dawson: 'The Piltdown faker' |last=Russell |first=Miles |date=23 November 2003 |work=BBC News |access-date=16 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110223225737/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3285163.stm |archive-date=23 February 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> In addition, Harry Morris, an acquaintance of Dawson, had come into possession of one of the flints obtained by Dawson at the Piltdown gravel pit. He suspected that it had been artificially aged – "stained by C. Dawson with intent to defraud". He remained deeply suspicious of Dawson for many years to come, though he never sought to discredit him publicly, possibly because it would have been an argument against the [[eolith]] theory, which Morris strongly supported.<ref>Weiner, ''The Piltdown Forgery'', pp. 140–45.</ref>

Adrian Lister of the [[Natural History Museum, London|UK's Natural History Museum]] has said that "some people have suggested" that there may also have been a second 'fraudster' seeking to use outrageous fraud in the hope of anonymously exposing the original frauds. This was a theory first proposed by [[Miles Russell]].<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Piltdown Man Hoax: Case Closed |last=Russell |first=Miles |publisher=The History Press |year=2012 |location=Stroud |pages=140–41}}</ref> He has explained that the piece nicknamed the 'cricket bat' (a fossilised elephant bone) was such a crudely forged 'early tool' that it may have been planted to cast doubt upon the other finds, the 'Earliest Englishman' in effect being recovered with the earliest evidence for the game of cricket. This seems to have been part of a wider attempt, by disaffected members of the Sussex archaeological community, to expose Dawson's activities, other examples being the obviously fraudulent 'Maresfield Map', the 'Ashburnham Dial', and the 'Piltdown Palaeolith'.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson |last=Russell |first=Miles |publisher=Tempus |year=2003 |location=Stroud |pages=141–148}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=The Piltdown Man Hoax: Case Closed |last=Russell |first=Miles |publisher=The History Press |year=2012 |location=Stroud |pages=129–41}}</ref> Nevertheless, the 'cricket bat' was accepted at the time, even though it aroused the suspicions of some and ultimately helped lead to the eventual recognition of the fraud decades later.<ref name="Lister01a">{{Cite web |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-20729787 |title=The infamous Piltdown 'cricket bat' |date=16 December 2012 |publisher=[[BBC]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141022023610/http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-20729787 |archive-date=22 October 2014 |url-status=live |access-date=6 October 2014}}</ref>

In 2016, the results<ref name="SingleHoaxer">{{Cite journal |last1=De Groote |first1=Isabelle |last2=Flink |first2=Linus Girdland |last3=Abbas |first3=Rizwaan |last4=Bello |first4=Silvia M. |last5=Burgia |first5=Lucia |last6=Buck |first6=Laura Tabitha |last7=Dean |first7=Christopher |last8=Freyne |first8=Alison |last9=Higham |first9=Thomas |title=New genetic and morphological evidence suggests that a single hoaxer created 'Piltdown man'|journal=Royal Society Open Science|date=10 August 2016|volume=3|issue=160328|pages=160328|doi=10.1098/rsos.160328|pmid=27853612|pmc=5108962}}</ref> of an eight-year review<ref name="ArticleBBC" /> of the forgery were released, identifying Dawson's [[modus operandi]]. Multiple specimens demonstrated the same consistent preparation: application of the stain, packing of crevices with local gravel, and fixation of teeth and gravel with dentist's putty. Analysis of shape and trace [[DNA]] showed that teeth from both sites belonged to the same orangutan.<ref name="ArticleBBC"/> The consistent method and common source indicated the work of one person on all the specimens, and Dawson was the only one associated with Piltdown II. The authors did not rule out the possibility that someone else provided the false fossils to Dawson but ruled out several other suspects, including Teilhard de Chardin and Doyle, based on the skill and knowledge demonstrated by the forgeries, which closely reflected ideas fashionable in biology at the time. On the other hand, [[Stephen Jay Gould]] judged that [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]] conspired with Dawson in the Piltdown forgery.<ref>{{Google books|o6g2tvN0nJoC|Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes: Further Reflections in Natural History|keywords=|text=|plainurl=}}</ref> Teilhard de Chardin had travelled to regions of Africa where one of the anomalous finds originated, and resided in the [[Wealden District|Wealden]] area from the date of the earliest finds (although others suggest that he was "without doubt innocent in this matter").<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Jesuit and the Skull: Teilhard de Chardin, Evolution, and the Search for Peking Man |last=Aczel |first=Amir D.|publisher=Riverhead Books |year=2007 |location=Stroud |page=224}}</ref> Hinton left a trunk in storage at the [[Natural History Museum, London|Natural History Museum]] in London that in 1970 was found to contain animal bones and teeth carved and stained in a manner similar to the carving and staining on the Piltdown finds. [[Phillip Tobias]] implicated Arthur Keith in helping Dawson by detailing the history of the investigation of the hoax, dismissing other theories, and listing inconsistencies in Keith's statements and actions.<ref>Phillip V. Tobias. 1992. ''Piltdown: An Appraisal of the Case against Sir Arthur Keith''. ''Current Anthropology'', Vol. 33, No. 3 (Jun. 1992), pp. 243–93 with Comments and Reply by Peter J. Bowler, Andrew T. Chamberlain, Christopher Chippindale, Robin W. Dennell, F. G. Fedele, Paul Graves, Caroline Grigson, G. Ainsworth Harrison, Francis B. Harrold, Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, Martin K. Nickels, Nicolas Rolland, Curtis Runnels, Frank Spencer, C. B. Stringer, N. C. Tappen, Bruce G. Trigger, Sherwood Washburn and R. V. S. Wright.[http://www.clarku.edu/~PILTDOWN/map_prim_suspects/KEITH/Keith_prosecution/apprais_Keith.html] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080516135154/http://www.clarku.edu/~piltdown/map_prim_suspects/KEITH/Keith_prosecution/apprais_Keith.html|date=16 May 2008}}</ref> Other investigations suggest that the hoax involved accomplices rather than a single forger.<ref>{{cite book | title=The Piltdown Forgery | first=J. S. |last=Weiner | publisher=Oxford University Press | date=29 January 2004 | isbn=978-0-198-60780-9 | pages=190–97}}</ref>

[[Richard Milner (historian)|Richard Milner]], an American historian of science, argued that [[Arthur Conan Doyle]] may have been the perpetrator of the Piltdown Man hoax. Milner noted that Doyle had a plausible motive—namely, revenge on the scientific establishment for debunking one of his favourite psychics—and said that [[The Lost World (Arthur Conan Doyle)|''The Lost World'']] appeared to contain several clues referring cryptically to his having been involved in the hoax.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml |title=Piltdown Man: Britain's Greatest Hoax |date=17 February 2011 |publisher=BBC |access-date=5 October 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140222211557/http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml |archive-date=22 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/feb/05/piltdown-man-archaeologys-greatest-hoax |title=Piltdown Man: British archaeology's greatest hoax |date=5 February 2012 |work=The Guardian |access-date=5 October 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141008100450/http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/feb/05/piltdown-man-archaeologys-greatest-hoax |archive-date=8 October 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> [[Samuel Rosenberg (writer)|Samuel Rosenberg]]'s 1974 book ''[[Naked is the Best Disguise]]'' purports to explain how, throughout his writings, Doyle had provided overt clues to otherwise hidden or suppressed aspects of his way of thinking that seemed to support the idea that Doyle would be involved in such a hoax.<ref>[[Samuel Rosenberg (writer)|Samuel Rosenberg]]. (1974). ''Naked is the Best Disguise: The Death and Resurrection of Sherlock Holmes''. Bobbs-Merrill. {{ISBN|0-14-004030-7}}.</ref> More recent research suggests that Doyle was not involved. In 2016, researchers at the [[Natural History Museum, London|Natural History Museum]] and [[Liverpool John Moores University]] analyzed DNA evidence showing that responsibility for the hoax lay with Dawson, who had originally "found" the remains. Dawson had initially not been considered the likely perpetrator, because the hoax was seen as being too elaborate for him to have devised; however, the DNA evidence showed that a supposedly ancient tooth Dawson had "discovered" in 1915 (at a different site) came from the same jaw as that of the Piltdown Man, suggesting that he had planted them both. That tooth, too, was later proven to have been planted as part of a hoax.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/projects/piltdown-man |title=Piltdown Man |website=www.bournemouth.ac.uk |language=en |access-date=18 November 2019 |archive-date=21 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191221171716/https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/projects/piltdown-man |url-status=live }}</ref>

Chris Stringer, an anthropologist from the Natural History Museum, was quoted as saying: "Conan Doyle was known to play [[golf]] at the Piltdown site and had even given Dawson a lift in his car to the area, but he was a public man and very busy[,] and it is very unlikely that he would have had the time [to create the hoax]. So there are some coincidences, but I think they are just coincidences. When you look at the fossil evidence[,] you can only associate Dawson with all the finds, and Dawson was known to be personally ambitious. He wanted professional recognition. He wanted to be a member of the Royal Society and he was after an MBE [sic<ref>The latter honour did not exist in the lifetime of Dawson, who died in August 1916; the Order of the British Empire was founded on 4 June 1917.</ref>]. He wanted people to stop seeing him as an amateur".<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/08/10/sir-arthur-conan-doyle-cleared-of-piltdown-man-hoax/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/08/10/sir-arthur-conan-doyle-cleared-of-piltdown-man-hoax/ |archive-date=12 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |title=Sir Arthur Conan Doyle cleared of Piltdown Man hoax |last=Knapton |first=Sarah |date=10 August 2016 |work=The Telegraph |language=en-GB |issn=0307-1235}}{{cbignore}}</ref>