Forbidden Archeology_ The Full Unabridged Edition - Michael A. Cremo [353]
In addition to the human fossils, the 1912 excavations at Piltdown yielded a variety of mammalian fossils. Dawson listed them as: “two small broken pieces of a molar tooth of a rather early Pliocene type of elephant, also a much-rolled cusp of a molar of Mastodon, portions of two teeth of Hippopotamus, and two molar teeth of a Pleistocene beaver.” He added: “In the adjacent field to the west, on the surface close to the hedge dividing it from the gravel bed, we found portions of a red deer’s antler and the tooth of a Pleistocene horse. These may have been thrown away by the workmen, or may have been turned up by a plough. . . . in the spoil heaps occurred part of a deer’s metatarsal. . . . All the specimens are highly mineralized with iron oxide” ( Dawson and Woodward 1913, p. 121).
Stone tools were also found: “Among the flints we found several undoubted flint implements, besides numerous ‘Eoliths.’ The workmanship of the former is similar to that of the Chellean or pre-Chellean stage” (Dawson and Woodward 1913, p. 122). In a footnote, Dawson stated: “Father P. Teilhard, S.J., who accompanied us on one occasion, discovered one of the implements in situ in the middle stratum of the gravel-bed, also a portion of the tooth of a Pliocene elephant from the lowest bed” (Dawson and Woodward 1913, p. 122).
The report of Dawson and Woodward (1913, p. 123) concluded: “It is clear that this stratified gravel at Piltdown is of Pleistocene age, but that it contains, in its lowest stratum, animal remains derived from some destroyed Pliocene deposit probably situated not far away, and consisting of worn and broken fragments. These were mixed with fragments of early Pleistocene mammalia in a better state of preservation, and both forms were associated with the human skull and mandible, which show no more wear and tear than they might have received in situ. Associated with these animal remains are ‘Eoliths,’both in a rolled and an unrolled condition; the former are doubtless derived from an older drift and the latter in their present form are of the age of the existing deposit. In the same bed, in only a very slightly higher stratum, occurred a flint implement, the workmanship of which resembles that of implements found at Chelles; and among the spoil-heaps were found others of a similar, though perhaps earlier, stage. From these facts it appears probable that the skull and mandible cannot safely be described as being earlier than the first half of the Pleistocene Epoch. The individual probably lived during a warm cycle in that age.”
In the decades that followed, many scientists agreed with Dawson and Woodward that the Piltdown man fossils belonged to the Early Pleistocene fauna, contemporary with the Piltdown gravels. Others, such as Sir Arthur Keith and A. T. Hopwood thought the Piltdown man fossils belonged with the older Late Pliocene (or Villafranchian) fauna that had apparently been washed into the Piltdown gravels from an older horizon (Oakley and Hoskins 1950, p. 379).
From the beginning, the Piltdown skull was deemed morphologically humanlike, although there was some disagreement about the cranial capacity. In 1913, Woodward estimated the brain capacity at 1,070 cc, perhaps more (Dawson and Woodward 1913, p. 126). This falls well below the average adult male human capacity of about 1,500 cc. But Sir Arthur Keith later