Bibliography - British Geological Survey

‘Piltdown Man’ inn was analysed by Dr Roy C. Hoather, and samples of gravel and loam from the Piltdown
site by Dr C. Bloomfield, both of which yielded notably low values of sulphate.)
Claringbull, G. F. & Hey, M. H. 1955. The X-ray crystallography of the Piltdown fossils. In: Further
contributions to the solution of the Piltdown problem / J. Weiner et al. Bulletin of the British Museum
(Natural History), Geology, 2 (6), 268–270, plate 31. (Formal report of the presentation made in 1954)
Claringbull, G. F. (see also under Anon. 1954c)
Clark, W. E. Le Gros (see under Le Gros Clark, W. E.)
Clarke, E. V. 1954. [Summary transcript of interview with J. S. Weiner concerning the character of Charles
Dawson.] See Spencer 1990b, 239, etc.
Clemens, W. A. 1963. Wealden mammalian fossils. Palaeontology, 6 (1), 55–69. (Includes a reassessment
of Plagiaulax dawsoni Woodward 1892, which is here described as being of doubtful affinity. All that now
remains is a fragment of the root of the molar tooth, the crown having been lost since it was last described by
Simpson in 1928. The root, as now revealed, contains only a single pulp cavity, which ‘strongly suggests
that it is not the tooth of a mammal’, pp. 55–56. Of the two so-called Plagiaulax-like teeth described by
Woodward in 1911, one tooth, M10481, is referable to Loxaulax valdensis, which was found by Teilhard de
Chardin; the other, M20241, has a crown which is so badly decayed that it cannot definitely be assigned as
mammalian, pp. 57–58.)
Clements, J. 1982. Piltdown revisited. Popular Archaeology, 3 (May), 30–31. (See response by Joel 1982)
Clements, J. 1997. Piltdown man again. Current Archaeology, 13 (7), no. 151, 277. (Description of the
events at Hastings, beginning in 1858, which could have provided Dawson with his ‘Piltdown’ material)
Clements, J. 1997. Reviewing Piltdown: the Hastings connection. Hastings Area Archaeological Research
Group Journal, new ser. no. 4 (Dec), 8‒10.
Clermont, N. 1992. On the Piltdown joker and accomplice: a French connection? Current Anthropology,
33 (5), 587. (A comment on Tobias’s defence of Teilhard de Chardin (ibid., 33, 244), in which the writer
quotes a letter from Teilhard which he interprets as providing evidence of Teilhard’s knowledge of the
existence of the Piltdown canine 13 months before he was to find it! Clermont’s reading of this letter has
been dismissed by Walsh (1996, 147–8). There was also some correspondence from Francis Thackeray
under this heading.)
Clinch, G. 1905. Early man. In: The Victoria history of the county of Sussex. Volume I, edited by W. Page,
309‒332. (Description and illustration of a piece of fossil red deer antler pierced by a square hole, which
Charles Dawson claimed was an ancient hammer found at Bulverhythe, pp. 327‒328 & plate facing p. 318.
The modern view, as expressed by Russell 2003, 86‒89, is that the hole has been cut with a steel knife in a
way comparable to the Piltdown ‘cricket bat’. Clinch also lists and illustrates (pp. 327, 330 and facing plate)
some objects from a Bronze Age hoard that was found at St Leonards on Sea and became part of the Dawson
Loan Collection at Hastings Museum, over which hang the usual question marks, Russell 2003, 89‒93. A
description of the Lavant Caves (pp. 326–327) represents the only published account of the findings of the
exploration undertaken in 1893 by Dawson and Lewis, apart from a report that appeared in the Sussex Daily
News, 11 Aug 1893; also included (plate facing p. 326) is a plan drawn by Lewis; see also McCann 1981.)
Cockburn, A. 1970. A skull for scandal. Sunday Times Magazine, 8 Mar, 30–34. (It was this account that
got the compiler of the present Select Bibliography hooked on the subject of Piltdown, and led in 1971 to his
first attempt at identifying published references, aided by his appointment in June of that year to a position in
the library at the Geological Survey, South Kensington, now at Keyworth, Nottingham.)
Cockburn, C. 1954. Truth is stranger than Piltdown. Punch, no. 227 (1 Dec), 687–689.
Cole, S. M. 1955. Counterfeit. London: John Murray, 209 pp. (The Piltdown puzzle, pp. 136–167. Also
discusses the infamous Glozel finds, mentioned by Teilhard in a letter to Oakley (Spencer 1990b, 212), and
the Calaveras skull. For an excellent account of the Glozel forgery, exposed in France in the late 1920s, see
A. Vayson de Pradenne, The Glozel forgeries, Antiquity, 4, no. 14, June 1930, 201–222, translated from the
French by O. G. S. Crawford.)