The Great Moon Hoax of 1835
Newspapers, Public Reactions, and the Impact on Lunar Myths
In August 1835, readers of the New York Sun found themselves captivated by a startling revelation: astronomers had supposedly discovered life on the Moon, including exotic landscapes and “man-bats.” The series, now known as the Great Moon Hoax, became one of the most famous media stunts of the nineteenth century, blurring the lines between journalism and fiction.
The Great Moon Hoax demonstrated how newspapers could shape public belief, spreading a sensational yet fabricated story that captured thousands of imaginations. Over six installments, the articles detailed fantastical lunar findings that many accepted as fact, revealing the public’s trust in printed news and the impact a single media source could wield.
As interest in science and astronomy grew, the Moon Hoax raised important questions about credibility, misinformation, and the responsibilities of journalists. Its legacy marks a turning point in the history of media, influencing how future generations approached news and skepticism.
Background and Historical Context
The Great Moon Hoax occurred during a period of expanding newsprint, intense interest in astronomy, and evolving standards for scientific reporting. These factors contributed directly to both the success and the believability of the hoax in 1835.
The Rise of 19th-Century Newspapers
In the early 1800s, newspapers in the United States underwent rapid growth, especially in urban areas like New York. Daily papers such as The Sun emerged, seeking to attract more readers with sensational stories. Prices fell due to new printing technology, and circulation for affordable papers soared.
Competition was stiff among publishers, fostering an environment where bold headlines and dramatic tales increased sales. Editors wanted stories that appealed to wide audiences. The push for unique and thrilling news led to instances, like the Moon Hoax, where the line between fact and fiction was blurred to captivate the public.
Table: Circulation Growth Example in 1830s New York
Newspaper Estimated Circulation (Early 1830s) The Sun ~8,000 per day (increased after hoax) Other major dailies Fewer than 3,000 per day
Public Fascination With Astronomy
The early 19th century saw a notable rise in public interest in astronomy. New observatories were established across Europe and America, and astronomical discoveries were regularly reported in the press. Telescopic technology was improving, enabling observers to see more celestial features than ever before.
People followed news of comets, planets, and lunar events with close attention. Science was not always easily distinguished from speculative fiction in popular media, fueling excitement about possible discoveries. The idea that life might exist on the Moon or other planets was openly debated, making the premise of lunar creatures plausible to many readers at the time.
Science Communication in the Early 1800s
In the 1830s, scientific news could be unreliable and sensationalized. Newspapers rarely consulted specialized science sources or fact-checked claims from supposed experts. Formal scientific communication was mostly limited to academic journals or correspondence, not widely accessible to the public.
Reports described as originating from "learned societies" or observatories could gain instant credibility, even when fabricated. The lack of clear standards for science reporting enabled hoaxes to spread quickly. While some readers were skeptical, many accepted extraordinary claims at face value, trusting the authority of newspapers.
The Sun Newspaper and Its Influence
In 1835, The Sun played a central role in popularizing the so-called discovery of life on the moon. The newspaper’s approach, reach, and public impact reflected key shifts in American journalism during the early nineteenth century.
The Role of The Sun in Media
The Sun, established in New York City in 1833, quickly became one of the leading penny press newspapers. By offering news for just one cent, it made information accessible to working-class readers who might otherwise be excluded.
It relied on high circulation and mass appeal. The Sun was innovative in its use of sensational stories, illustrations, and a focus on local news. Its approach marked a shift away from partisan papers toward a more commercial, widely read press.
As a New York newspaper, The Sun’s distribution network was extensive for its time. It reached thousands of readers daily and influenced public opinion in the city and beyond. The Moon Hoax series exemplified the paper’s willingness to publish extraordinary stories to engage and expand its audience.
Editorial Practices of 1835
In 1835, editorial standards and fact-checking processes differed significantly from those of modern newspapers. Editors often relied on freelance correspondents or reprinted content from other sources without thorough verification.
The Sun’s editorial team, seeking stories to boost sales, embraced sensationalism and fiction in its reporting. The Moon Hoax articles, claiming to be based on accounts by the famous astronomer Sir John Herschel, were published in a series without clear indication that they were fabrications.
These editorial decisions reflected a broader trend in penny press journalism, where entertainment value and commercial success often took precedence over accuracy. The lack of immediate retraction, even after doubts arose, highlights the newspaper’s priorities.
Widespread Public Reception
The public reacted strongly to The Sun’s moon articles. Many readers accepted the fantastical details of lunar life, including descriptions of winged humanoids and lush landscapes, as credible.
News spread quickly through word of mouth, public readings, and reprints by other newspapers. This broad dissemination fueled further fascination with the supposed discoveries. The popularity of the series demonstrated both the growing power of mass media and the public’s appetite for sensational news.
Some scientific and religious figures expressed skepticism, but the paper’s circulation soared regardless. The eventual revelation that the stories were fictional did little to diminish The Sun’s popularity, illustrating the lingering influence of sensational reporting.
The Creation of The Great Moon Hoax
The Great Moon Hoax originated in New York in 1835 as an elaborate piece of fake journalism. Its creation involved a blend of imaginative writing, scientific references, and a calculated plan to attract public attention.
Richard Adams Locke’s Authorship
Richard Adams Locke, a reporter and editor for The Sun, was the main architect of the hoax. He wrote the articles anonymously, only later being identified as the author. Locke's intention was partly to satirize earlier, less credible astronomical claims, but he was also motivated by the desire to increase the newspaper’s circulation.
He crafted the narrative in a way that lent it credibility, using the name of Sir John Herschel, a respected British astronomer, as a supposed source. Locke presented the reports as coming from Dr. Andrew Grant, a fictional companion to Herschel, adding another layer of apparent authenticity.
Inspiring Sources and Motivations
Locke drew inspiration for the articles from several earlier works. The Edinburgh Journal of Science had previously published reports of supposed lunar discoveries, and these kinds of stories were already popular with readers. Locke saw both the appetite for exotic science and an opportunity for parody.
One notable influence may have been Scoperte fatte nella Luna, an Italian pamphlet that contributed similar fictitious content about discoveries on the Moon. Locke’s motivations were not purely satirical; increasing newspaper sales and outdoing competitors were clear goals for The Sun as well. The context of scientific curiosity made the hoax more likely to succeed.
The Six-Part Series Publication
The Great Moon Hoax was revealed through six separate articles published by The Sun between August 25 and August 31, 1835. Each installment built on the last, describing in increasing detail the supposed discoveries made with a powerful telescope.
The reports started with claims of vegetation and animals and escalated to accounts of bat-like lunar humanoids and fantastical structures. The serialized format kept readers eagerly returning, which led to a rapid rise in the newspaper’s popularity and sales.
Table: Key Details from the Hoax Series
Installment Notable Claims 1 Discovery of lunar vegetation and rivers 2 Description of animal life 3 First mention of lunar humanoids 4 Details about lunar cities and temples 5 Further descriptions of bizarre moon wildlife 6 Summary and “conclusions” by the expedition
Sir John Herschel and Astronomical Authority
Sir John Herschel was a respected English astronomer whose name became tied to the infamous Great Moon Hoax of 1835. The incident showcased how public trust in scientific figures can be used both to inform and mislead.
Who Was John Herschel?
Sir John Herschel (1792–1871) was a pioneering English astronomer, mathematician, and chemist. He was the son of William Herschel, famed discoverer of Uranus.
John Herschel's work expanded the catalog of stars, nebulae, and other celestial phenomena, and he played a major role in developing photographic techniques. He was known for his expedition to South Africa during the 1830s, where he conducted key astronomical surveys of the southern sky.
In addition to his work in astronomy, Herschel contributed to mathematics and physics. His reputation rested on careful observation, scientific rigor, and public lectures that were widely respected.
Association With the Hoax
The Great Moon Hoax articles, published in the New York Sun in August 1835, falsely claimed that Sir John Herschel had discovered life on the moon. They attributed fantastical findings—such as “man-bats” and lunar forests—to Herschel and a fictional companion, Andrew Grant.
No part of the story was based on Herschel’s actual work or statements. The use of his name lent authority and credibility to the fabricated account. At the time, newspapers did not immediately fact-check such claims, and readers were inclined to trust a scientist of Herschel's stature.
This association was entirely invented by the writers of the hoax, exploiting Herschel's widespread fame for their own purposes. Herschel himself was unaware of the series while it was being printed.
Impact on Herschel’s Reputation
Sir John Herschel’s reputation for scientific integrity largely protected him from lasting damage. Many in the scientific community quickly recognized the lunar discoveries were fiction.
Despite the hoax’s wide reach, Herschel’s standing among astronomers remained strong. Some public confusion lingered briefly, but his documented achievements and published observations contradicted the claims made in the hoax.
His precise, careful work in astronomy endured, and the event did little to undermine his influence in scientific circles. Herschel’s experience became an example of how media can distort reputations, but also how established credibility can withstand false reports.
The Alleged Discovery: Life on the Moon
In 1835, a series of articles in the New York Sun claimed the discovery of remarkable features and beings on the lunar surface. These stories were said to come from the Cape of Good Hope, boosting public intrigue about the moon and its supposed civilizations.
Claims of Civilizations and Structures
The articles described detailed observations of life on the moon, reporting the existence of multiple species and even entire civilizations. They claimed to have seen bipedal humanoid creatures, later famously called "Vespertilio-homo" or man-bats. These beings were said to engage in activities suggesting intelligence and society.
In addition to the man-bats, the articles mentioned animals resembling bison, goats, and even unicorns living alongside the lunar inhabitants. Stone temples and complex architectural structures were described as products of this civilization.
The narrative attributed these findings to an impressive new telescope at the Cape of Good Hope observatory. The reports fueled wild fascination, as readers believed scientists had truly uncovered alien life and advanced societies beyond Earth.
Descriptions of Lunar Surface and Landscape
The fictional reports provided intricate descriptions of the moon's surface, presenting it as a lush and varied world. The articles spoke of vast forests, flowing rivers, and crystal-clear lakes bordering fields of amethyst and garnet. Colors, shapes, and details of the land were presented with scientific precision, adding to the story’s credibility.
Mountains and valleys were said to rise impressively from the surface, with evidence of vegetation and trees similar to those found on Earth. These geographical features were often linked to the activities of supposed lunar inhabitants, whose homes blended with the natural landscape.
Each observation was supplied with precise measurements and apparent first-hand detail, closely mimicking authentic astronomical reports. This elaborate attention to the lunar surface contributed to wide acceptance of the hoax by the public.
Real Observations vs. Fabrications
When scrutinized, the reports showed clear departures from legitimate astronomical observations of the time. No contemporary telescopes—including those at the Cape of Good Hope—had the capability to provide such detail of the lunar surface.
Scientists and astronomers gradually pointed out inconsistencies and physical impossibilities in the articles. For example, atmospheric and environmental conditions on the moon were already understood to be hostile to life as described. The vivid descriptions of structures and civilizations contradicted everything known about the actual lunar landscape.
Ultimately, the "discoveries" were revealed to be fabrications, designed for satire and entertainment rather than actual science. The stories demonstrate the power of persuasive language and the public’s readiness to accept extraordinary claims when presented with apparent authority and detail.
The Fantastic Lunar Creatures
In 1835, readers encountered a vivid array of supposed lunar fauna, each described in surprisingly specific detail. Reports claimed telescopic observations had revealed a world teeming with creatures both remarkable and unfamiliar to science.
Vespertilio-Homo: The Bat-Like Winged Humanoids
Among the most astonishing entities described were the vespertilio-homo, or "man-bats." These beings were said to be humanoid in form, standing upright but covered with a short, copper-colored hair. Large, membranous wings extended from their backs, enabling flight much like earthly bats.
Eyewitness accounts claimed the bat-people lived in constructed shelters, demonstrating intelligence and social organization. Scenes depicted them fishing, conversing, and engaging in what was described as a peaceful society. Details provided painted these lunar inhabitants as the most advanced forms of life on the moon, notable for their expressive faces and seemingly harmonious communities.
The presence of such figures was crucial to the hoax's appeal—they combined familiar human traits with the marvels of unexplored worlds, blurring the line between wonder and plausibility.
Unicorns and Extraordinary Beasts
The lunar surface was also populated by fantastic animals unknown on Earth. Writers described a moon unicorn—an animal similar in appearance to a goat or antelope, with a single long horn projecting from its forehead. This creature was said to possess a silky white coat and exhibited a gentle demeanor.
Illustrated accounts included various other extraordinary beasts. Some bore scales and wings; others resembled large reptiles and amphibia, all adapted to the lunar landscape. The complexity and variety of these animals were presented as evidence of a biologically rich and diverse moon.
This catalog of beings helped reinforce the credibility of the astronomical "discoveries" by invoking natural history and the era's fascination with the unknown.
Goats, Bison, and Bipedal Tail-less Beavers
Reports detailed herds that looked much like terrestrial bison, grazing across the lunar plains. These lunar bison were described as robust, with shaggy coats and horns, depicted behaving similarly to their Earth counterparts.
Other notable creatures included goat-like animals and, perhaps most curiously, bipedal, tail-less beavers. These beaver figures were described as walking on two legs and constructing complex shelters, even using tools—actions typically associated with more advanced species.
The descriptions of these animals emphasized both their strangeness and their faint resemblance to familiar mammals, offering readers a mixture of the expected and the fantastic. These accounts played a key role in sustaining readers' belief, if only temporarily, in a moon alive with extraordinary creatures.
Imagery and Illustrations
Images played a central role in shaping how readers perceived the supposed lunar discoveries reported in 1835. The blend of original engravings and adapted stock images gave visual credibility to the otherwise fictional reports.
Use of Engravings and Stock Images
Publishers turned to engravings to visualize the reported lunar life, including human-bat creatures and other imagined beings. These engravings were the primary means to depict scenes described in The Sun newspaper’s articles.
Often, stock images or previously created engravings were modified to fit the lunar theme. Printers reused existing visuals—sometimes adding new elements—to speed up production and reduce costs. The result was a collection of artwork blending science with fantasy, making the hoax more accessible.
No photographs or videos existed at the time, so readers relied solely on these illustrations. The strategic use of engravings and stock images gave the fabricated stories an authoritative aesthetic.
Role of Vectors and Illustrative Techniques
While the term "vector graphics" did not exist in 1835, illustrators used various hand-drawn lines and shading techniques found in engraving to create detailed and repeatable images. These techniques enabled artists to highlight features of the invented lunar landscape—craters, plants, and supposed animals.
Illustrators emphasized clarity and repetition, frequently reusing motifs to keep the stories visually coherent across the six articles. Techniques such as cross-hatching, stippling, and precise outlining helped create depth and detail, enhancing the sense of realism for each lunar scene.
Below is a brief list of common illustrative techniques:
Cross-hatching: Layered parallel lines for shading
Stippling: Dots to create texture and gradation
Outlining: Defining forms with strong contours
These approaches supported the narrative by giving the public a tangible, if misleading, visualization of the Moon.
Public Reaction to Visual Representation
The public strongly engaged with the illustrations, treating them as evidence of the extraordinary claims. Many readers trusted the credibility of printed images and considered them factual representations.
People discussed and analyzed details within the engravings, from creature anatomy to artificial-built structures. Some even made purchasing decisions or attended lectures based on the images alone, demonstrating the persuasive power of visual media.
Skepticism did exist, but the striking images gave pause even to doubters. The absence of alternative sources—such as videos or photographs—meant engravings and adapted stock images heavily influenced the public’s imagination regarding lunar life.
Scientific Instruments and Observatories
Claims made in the Great Moon Hoax were supported by detailed descriptions of scientific equipment and observation methods. The narrative focused on an impressive telescope in South Africa, elaborate techniques, and how these presentations shaped how people viewed astronomy and science.
The Immense Telescope at the Cape of Good Hope
The New York Sun’s articles highlighted a fictional “immense telescope” said to be built at the Cape of Good Hope observatory. Writers attributed the construction to noted British astronomer Sir John Herschel, adding credibility to the reports.
According to the hoax, this telescope boasted an enormous lens 24 feet in diameter, supposedly enabling scientists to observe life forms on the lunar surface. These included fantastical descriptions of lunar animals and human-like creatures. Although the real Cape of Good Hope observatory existed and Herschel was conducting legitimate research, the Sun’s telescope was pure invention.
Descriptions included technical jargon and comparisons, increasing the plausibility of the fabricated device. Lists of supposed components, such as a gigantic tube and unique optical glass, further convinced readers of its reality. The blend of real locations and fabricated technology strengthened the story’s impact.
Methods of Fictitious Observation
The articles meticulously described observational methods to enhance the illusion. Reported techniques included “hydro-oxygen microscopes” and advanced mounting systems capable of tracking the moon’s movements in real time. These details created an illusion of scientific rigor.
Writers referenced plausible experimental setups, including detailed diagrams (never actually published) and lengthy explanations of how the telescope collected and focused lunar light. They described how research teams made nightly observations and documented findings, implying a systematic, objective process.
Carefully chosen vocabulary, such as “refracting power,” “magnification,” and “ocular instruments,” echoed real scientific discussions of the 1830s. These tricks blurred the lines between fiction and credible method, making the hoax harder for the public to question.
Influence on Public Perception of Science
The blending of fact and fantasy in the Great Moon Hoax significantly influenced public attitudes toward astronomy. By naming actual observatories and scientists, the articles fostered trust and curiosity among readers, many of whom had limited knowledge of telescopes or astronomical research.
The story’s detailed technical claims led people to believe that science could rapidly produce dramatic breakthroughs. Confidence in observational technology increased, though this was based on false premises. For many Americans, it made astronomy appear accessible and exciting.
However, its impact also revealed the vulnerability of the public to scientific-sounding language and impressive descriptions. Without broader access to real scientific information or expertise, many readers took the reports at face value, a lesson in both the power and risks of authoritative-sounding journalism.
Hoax Debunked and Lasting Impact
The Great Moon Hoax of 1835 left a notable mark on journalism, public trust, and speculative fiction. The event’s exposure, Edgar Allan Poe’s literary engagement, and the hoax’s role in shaping media thinking remain significant.
Exposure and Skepticism
In the days following the publication, scientific circles and skeptical readers began to question the plausibility of the claims. The alleged discoveries of lunar animals and civilizations, particularly the “man-bats,” lacked any independent confirmation from other astronomers or observatories. Researchers pointed out scientific inconsistencies, such as the sophisticated telescopic technology supposedly used.
When the Edinburgh Journal of Science, from which the story was allegedly reprinted, was shown to have ceased publication years before, doubts became more widespread. The New York Sun, which had published the articles, eventually admitted to the fabrication after public pressure. The episode highlighted the lack of verification in some news reporting of the era and sparked ongoing debates about media responsibility.
Edgar Allan Poe’s Involvement
Edgar Allan Poe played an indirect but interesting role in the hoax’s development. Poe had published “The Unparalleled Adventure of One Hans Pfaall” earlier in 1835, a story also featuring lunar travel and imaginative science. He believed the hoax in the Sun plagiarized elements from his work, especially the use of pseudo-scientific details and the framing of outlandish claims as fact.
Poe publicly expressed his frustration, claiming that his story may have inspired the hoax’s style and content. However, the attribution has never been definitively proven. This episode helped cement Poe’s reputation as an innovator in speculative fiction and demonstrated how fiction and journalism could overlap in the early nineteenth century.
Legacy in Media and Popular Culture
The Great Moon Hoax set a precedent for sensational news and media-driven myths. Its massive readership—people reportedly crowded outside the Sun’s offices to buy copies—revealed the public’s appetite for captivating, if dubious, stories. The hoax is now recognized as an early example of “fake news,” and it influenced both journalistic standards and satirical literature that followed.
Elements of the hoax, such as the depiction of lunar civilizations and man-bats, have resurfaced in books, plays, and later media as references to gullibility and the danger of unchecked reporting. Modern studies of media ethics often reference the Moon Hoax as a pivotal moment. It continues to serve as a cautionary tale about critical thinking and the power of sensational storytelling.
Conclusion
The Great Moon Hoax of 1835 demonstrated the influence newspapers held in shaping public opinion. The New York Sun’s sensational reports captivated thousands, illustrating the demand for engaging and extraordinary stories.
This event showed how easily scientific language and authority could be used to create believable yet entirely fictional narratives. Readers and even some experts accepted the existence of life on the moon without strong skepticism.
Key points highlighted by the hoax include:
The importance of verifying sources before accepting claims.
The public’s interest in scientific discoveries.
The power of media to spread both information and misinformation.
Table: Lessons from the Great Moon Hoax
Lesson Description Source Verification Fact-check before believing sensational reports Critical Thinking Question information that seems unlikely Media Influence Recognize media’s role in shaping belief
The impact of the hoax remains a significant example of media-driven misinformation. It continues to prompt discussions about the responsibilities of journalists and the need for critical scrutiny by readers.
