The Piltdown problem reconsidered
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3240774 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kenneth P Oakley (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1976 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 197 |
| Pages | 9-13 |
| Publication date | 1976-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Antiquity (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0003-598X • E-ISSN: 1745-1744 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0003598x00070563 |
| OpenAlex | W2474314030 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
Originally there were two main points of controversy about Piltdown. Did the Piltdown cranium and the Piltdown jaw-bone (mandible) represent one creature, 'Eoanthropus' as Smith Woodward inferred; or did they belong to two creatures, the cranium that of a man and the jaw-bone that of an ape, as David Waterston, Gerrit Miller and A. T. Marston believed? The second point of controversy concerned the antiquity of the specimens
Archaeology · Biology · Creatures · Genus · Mandible (arthropod mouthpart) · Miller · Natural (archaeology) · Skull · Zoology · Anatomy · History · Knowledge Societies in the 21st Century · Medicine · Paleontology · Philosophy
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |