The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret [Hardcover]

Seth Shulman (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0393062066 | ISBN-13: 978-0393062069 | Publication Date: January 17, 2008 | Edition: 1

A gripping intrigue at the heart of one of the world’s most important inventions.

While researching Alexander Graham Bell at MIT’s Dibner Institute, Seth Shulman scrutinized Bell’s journals and within them he found the smoking gun, a hint of deeply buried historical intrigue. Delving further, Shulman unearthed the surprising story behind the invention of the telephone: a tale of romance, corruption, and unchecked ambition. Bell furtively—and illegally—copied part of Elisha Gray’s invention in the race to secure what would become the most valuable U.S. patent ever issued. And afterward, as Bell’s device led to the world’s largest monopoly, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, he hid his invention’s illicit beginnings. In The Telephone Gambit, Shulman challenges the reputation of an icon of invention, rocks the foundation of a corporate behemoth, and offers a probing meditation on how little we know about our own history.

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

Amazon Best of the Month, January 2008: Seth Shulman closely examines the race to build the first telephone and uncovers potential bombshells with The Telephone Gambit. Although Alexander Graham Bell is widely accepted as the father of the telephone (despite the fact that rival inventor Elisha Gray submitted a similar claim the same day Bell filed his patent), Schulman provides intriguing evidence questioning if the scales were deliberately tipped in Alexander's favor. Was the venerable inventor party to theft from Gray's own research? Or are such accusations merely sour grapes from a bitterly contested legal battle? Fraught with controversy, conspiracy, and possible chicanery, Shulman spins real-life Da Vinci Code drama around one of the most influential inventions of the modern era. --Dave Callanan

From Bookmarks Magazine

In Unlocking the Sky (2003), Seth Shulman showed his knack for historical detection by making credible claims that aviation pioneer Glenn Curtiss deserves the same accolades for his work as the Wright brothers for theirs. In The Telephone Gambit, Shulman, who researched the book while a resident scholar in MIT’s Dibner Institute, sets his sights on Alexander Graham Bell. He comes away with a stunning and plausible conclusion as he discredits Bell’s claim to the world’s most valuable patent. Drawing on research from Bell’s own notebooks and other sources, Shulman combines deft sleuthing and a nose for a good story with what every critic except the reviewer for the Los Angeles Times deems lively, compact prose. The Telephone Gambit is a necessary addendum to textbook history.
Copyright © 2004 Phillips & Nelson Media, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company; 1 edition (January 17, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0393062066
• ISBN-13: 978-0393062069
• Product Dimensions: 8.5 x 6.1 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (39 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,019,597 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

32 of 36 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Why did I buy into the "beat by an hour" story about Elisha Gray, January 7, 2008

By 

Jeffrey M. Musser - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret (Hardcover)

I have just finished reading "The Telephone Gambit" by Seth Schulman. This is the first book that I have sat down and read in one day since my September vacation. I know nothing about Seth's other books and can't comment on the caustic review by zzoott (River Styx, OH, USA)

I was drawn to this book by the review in the Boston Globe on New Year's Day. http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2008/01/02/hang_on_a_minute/

I previously worked for the "other" telephone company. I worked at GTE Labs in Waltham, MA (what remains is now Verizon Labs). In the summer time in the late `80s we usually had summer students join us, and I often gave a presentation on the history of the Telephone. . In fact one of my vugraphs (we didn't have PowerPoint then) is the same photo shown by Seth on page 61, the tangle of telegraph wires in 1870.

I bought in to the story that "Elisha Gray was an hour late filing his patent; that Bell got there first. It now is embarrassing to say that I bought in. This was a research lab and we all used scientific principals and investigative techniques to do our work. So how could I buy in to a difference in filing time being the reason? We all knew that the American patent system is "the first to discover" not "the first to file" as is most of Europe. After all, that is why we all kept Lab notebooks detailing our work, notebooks that were signed, dated and witnessed every day to prove when we had discovered.

As a result I found Seth Schulman's detailed account of the Bell patent extremely exciting. He meticulously lays out all the circumstantial evidence indicating something really smells about the process that granted the Bell patent over the Gray patent. And he presents a very convincing smoking gun that indicates there had to have been a payoff at the patent office or something like the Watergate burglers at that time.

Skeptics might say "how could 132 years go by without anyone noticing all of this?" Well the smoking gun was protected by the Bell family until 1976, and only made available to the general public in 1999. No one unrelated ever saw Bell's lab notebook until then

Some who read this of course won't be convinced; saying the evidence doesn't fit so you must acquit. But I encourage anyone who has worked with the Telephone or other means of communication, read it for yourself and make up your own mind.

7 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Entertaining and iconoclastic, November 1, 2008

By 

Metallurgist (USA) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret (Hardcover)

Those familiar with the history of the telephone are well aware that the key patent for the telephone was filed at the US patent office independently by Elisha Gray and Alexander Graham Bell on the same day in 1877. The conventional interpretation of this remarkable coincidence is that it was indeed a remarkable coincidence, or that somehow Gray tried to steal Bell's idea. The thesis of this book is that Bell (or one of his backers) was the likely thief and that Bell's patent was awarded through what may have been the greatest patent fraud in history. These are strong charges, but as the author shows, they are not new. In the years that followed this remarkable dual filing there were ten years of litigation and a congressional investigation aimed at sorting out who had the rightful claim as the father of the telephone. The author cites several other books that claim that Gray, not Bell was the inventor of the telephone. The author's key original contribution to this investigation was an analysis of Bell's laboratory notebook (long hidden from public view by the Bell family). This notebook contains a sketch of the telephone that is very similar to the one used by Gray in his filing, but it appears in Bell's notebook only AFTER Gray's and Bell's filings. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Bell was experimenting with the successful technique described by Gray prior to a trip that Bell took to Washington, during which time both he and Gray made their filings. Now as in the 19th century, the priority of an invention under US patent law (I hold 15 US patents so this is an area with which I have some knowledge) is based on the date that the idea was conceived, not the date at which a patent is applied for. This is why patent notebooks are kept and Bell's notebook does not support the case that he developed the telephone before Gray. On the contrary, Bell's notebook points to his involvement in a monumental fraud. The author cites a clear motive for fraud and many other curious occurrences that lay behind Bell's filing, including a deposition by the patent examiner in charge of the case that states that, in violation of the law, he showed Bell Gray's filing. I will not cite the many other factors that led the author to the conclusion that Bell, not Gray was guilty of fraud (some are covered in previous reviews), but suffices to say I think that the case against Bell is rather strong, strong enough to raise real questions concerning the accepted history of the development of the telephone.

Shulman is a journalist, not a historian, and the book reflects this. Rather than just being a chronological examination of the history, the book is written from the standpoint of the author's quest to understand who, if anyone, stole what from whom. Thus, about half the book is concerned with the process by which Shulman came to his conclusions and his learning how a professional historian should approach his subject. Interspersed with this is his evocation of Bell's life, Bell's work with the deaf, Bell's scientific investigations of the telegraph and telephone, and finally the possible motivation that may have led to his involvement in a blatant fraud.

I would have given the book 5 stars instead of only 4 were it not for a curious omission. The key court case (the Dowd patent case) is mentioned in several places, but is never (in my opinion at least) sufficiently presented. Bell prevailed over Gray's backers (Western Electric Co.) and as part of the settlement Western Electric was required to publicly state that Bell was the inventor of the telephone. Why, if the evidence against Bell was strong (even without the patent notebook, which was then not available) did Western Electric agree to make such a strong statement of Bell's priority over Gray and what if anything did Western Electric get from the settlement? This statement forms the bedrock of the Bell version of history. Without a clear discussion of why this statement was given, I got the impression that I was hearing from only one side of the case.

This book will be of interest to those interested in the history of technology, 19th century history and to the life and times of Alexander Graham Bell. The writing is clear and the book is a quick read. It may, however, raise the ire of Bell partisans (see some of the one star reviews), but even they will learn something if they approach this subject with an open mind.

21 of 30 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Overwhelming evidence is presented that Bell went along with the theft of Elisha Gray's work, January 6, 2008

By 

Michael Emmett Brady "mandmbrady" (Bellflower, California ,United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret (Hardcover)

This book provides overwhelming evidence that Alexander Graham Bell did not invent the telephone.The inventor of the telephone was Elisha Gray.Elisha Gray was a highly regarded electrical researcher.His telephone design was based on a process he called liquid transmission(liquid transmitter).Gray was a generally recognized American expert in this approach.In contrast,Shulman's examination of ALL of Bell's lab books and notes on his research work on the telephone shows that there is NO mention of any such process involving electrical current.The sketch of Gray's invention ,which was submitted with his patent claim,is practically identical to the same sketch submitted later in Bell's patent application.There is no question that Bell did not invent the telephone.Gray did.

However,did Bell actually steal Gray's invention or was the theft committed by Bell's financier,, G.G. Hubbard,a wealthy Boston businessman who was bankrolling Bell? Shulman provides overwhelming evidence that Bell was deeply in love with Hubbard's daughter,Mabel,whom he was teaching and would later marry.
The conclusion one reaches is that Hubbard stole the diagram and attached it to Bell's patent application.Shulman himself does not consider who was the actual thief.
This type of behavior should not be at all shocking.Many other such dastardly deeds have been unearthed in the last 40 years,such as Crick and Watson's breaking into Rosalind Franklin's locked lab in order to obtain copies of her x ray photographs of the double helix structure of DNA(RNA)or Einstein refusing to acknowledge the role of his wife ,Meliva,in his four 1904 papers.