Because we could all use a mode booster, here’s a fun story about the confusion surrounding the discovery of the first ever recognized Neanderthal. A #histsci story time thread about fossils, bribery, and beer for #SundayFunday (1/n)

The first fossils that were ever recognized to be in the category we now call "Neanderthal" were found accidentally in the Neander Valley, Germany in 1856 (because thal—now spelled tal—means valley, get it?). (2/n)

In the mid nineteenth century, the Neander Valley was a quarry site, and the ancient bones were dug out from a cave within a limestone wall, by quarry workers who always cleared out all the caves before blasting the limestone. To them, the fossils were just more debris. (3/n)

This particular cave was fairly high up on the valley wall, so the debris shoveled out of the cave—including the fossils—tumbled tens of meters down a cliffside to rest on the valley floor below. (4/n)

Not long after, an interested local schoolteacher, Johann Carl Fuhlrott, came by and collected the bones from the valley floor. This picture illustrates the bones that survived the fall. Fuhlrott thought they might be that of a prehistoric cave bear. (5/n)

Fuhlrott brought them to an anatomist at the nearby university, a man named Hermann Schaaffhausen, who quickly realized they were not that of a cave bear. The bones looked human. He thought they were an ancient race of humans. (6/n)

Fuhlrott and Schaaffhausen published on the fossils the following year, presenting them at numerous scientific society meetings in Germany. The finds were controversial, however, and one problem kept reoccurring: scientists needed to know more about the fossils’ age. (7/n)

“The apparent ape-like, but really maldeveloped idiot character of its conformation is so hideous,” on scientist wrote, “that every effort should be made to determine its probable date in time.” (8/n)

Schaaffhausen had claimed the bones were ancient—this was a crucial aspect to his argument about the Neanderthal being an ancient race of human. But on what evidence? How could he prove it? (9/n)

It used to be that you could prove a bone’s ancient, fossilized status by licking it (see my article on the tongue test here: http://bit.ly/359alkd ). Unfortunately, that unreliable method was going out of style. Thus, how could they know if the bones were ancient? (10/n)

Context is often used to determine antiquity. How deep in the dirt had the fossils been found, for example? Had any other creatures been found along with them—ancient mammoths, perhaps? But the quarry workers had destroyed important geologic information with their shovels. (11/n)

Two years after the discovery, Fuhlrott returned to the Neander Valley to question the workers about the context in which their shovels struck bone. Their names were allegedly named Alessandro and Luigi. Unfortunately, however, much time had passed. (12/n)

These two men were probably not the least bit interested in what had happened on that day in 1856, two years prior. And Fuhlrott did not conduct his visit in a manner that encouraged them to recall any details. (13/n)

Firstly, Fuhlrott arrived with a lawyer. Yikes. Were the workers in some kind of trouble? Secondly, more importantly, Fuhlrott failed to provide any incentive for Alessandro and Luigi to give him information. (14/n)

At the time, it was customary to offer money—or beer—in exchange for cooperation. But Alessandro and Luigi received neither. In return, Fuhlrott learned absolutely nothing from the exchange. (15/n)

The antiquity of the Neanderthal Man remained unanswered for many years to come. It would be decades until other fossils were found and their geologic context carefully examined and documented. Only then was the Neanderthal considered valid. (16/n)

The lesson here? Bribe with beer, only always. (17/17) Charles Knight