In Human Origins research, remains are difficult to find and scarce. When a fossil appears, scientists tend to highlight its value both in scientific publications and mass media. At the same time, they tend to restrict the access of other scientists to the fossil. Thus, the attention of the media and the control over bones determines the way knowledge is produced in paleoanthropology. Therefore, an appropriate analysis of the spaces and actors involved in these processes seems crucial.

In 1982, a cranial fragment that seemed to be from a hominid was found in Venta Micena, an excavation site in Orce, Granada (Spain). Although the internal part of the bone still adhered to the rock, the discovery was published in a Spanish paleontological journal and presented at a press conference. The bone was around 1,4 million-years-old and it might have been the “First European”, so it had a great impact in the Spanish media. In the course of the following year, the fossil was cleaned in the Museu d'Arqueologia de Catalunya, in Barcelona. After the removal of the matrix a crest appeared. This anatomical feature would be highly unusual for hominids. Therefore the fragment was attributed to a donkey. This new interpretation was reported for the first time by the newspaper El País. A very harsh controversy began; innovative and classical studies were applied to the fossil that appeared in numerous scientific papers and news items in the course of the next 20 years.

In this paper, I aim to show how “The Orce Man” (and “the Orce Donkey” as well) was “constructed” by different actors (experts, museum restorers, journalists, the public...) along excavation sites, laboratories and scientific and popular media. I also want to emphasize how the fossil itself played a central role in the struggle of its discoverer Josep Gibert to have it recognized as hominid.