Forbidden Archeology_ The Full Unabridged Edition - Michael A. Cremo [335]
7.3.2 First Find at Sangiran
Gradually, the history of human ancestors in Java seemed to be clearing up, but more work was needed. in 1934, von Koenigswald journeyed to Sangiran, a site west of trinil on the Solo River. He took with him several Javanese workers, including his trained collector, Atma, who also served as von Koenigswald’s cook and laundryman in the field.
Von Koenigswald (1956, p. 88) wrote: “there was great rejoicing in the kampong over our arrival. the men gathered all the jaws and teeth they could lay hands on and offered to sell them to us. even the women and girls, who are generally so retiring, took part.” When one considers that most of the finds attributed to von Koenigswald were actually made by local villagers or native collectors, who were paid by the piece in most cases, the scene described cannot but cause some degree of uneasiness.
At the end of 1935, because of funding cutbacks in the midst of the worldwide economic depression, von Koenigswald’s position with Java’s Geological Survey was terminated. Undeterred, von Koenigswald kept his servant Atma and others working at Sangiran, financing their activities with contributions from his wife and colleagues in Java.
Uncovered during this period was what appeared to be the fossilized right half of the upper jaw of an adult Pithecanthropus erectus. this fossil jaw from Sangiran is designated S1a in table 7.2 on p. 498. An examination of many reports by von Koenigswald has failed to turn up any description by him of exactly how this specimen was found. But the British researcher K. p. Oakley and his associates stated (Oakley et al. 1975, p. 108) that the fossil was found in 1936 on the surface of exposed lake deposits east of Kalijoso in central Java by collectors employed by von Koenigswald.
Considering that S1a was a surface find, it is surprising that modern authorities (Oakley et al. 1975, p. 109) have concluded that this fossil is of the same Middle to early pleistocene age as the exposed djetis beds where it was found (see Section 7.5.1 for more on the age of the djetis beds). the fact that the S1a upper jaw fragment is fossilized is not a guarantee of any great age, because there is evidence that bone can be fossilized in periods as short as a few hundred years. it might be argued that in the Sangiran region there are no strata younger
than those of the Middle pleistocene Kabuh formation, which lie over the djetis beds of the putjangan formation. And therefore the jaw should be at least Middle pleistocene in age. But the S1a jaw was said to have been found by paid collectors, who may have imported it from almost anywhere.
As we have seen in our discussions of anomalous discoveries made in Argentina and elsewhere, professional scientists sometimes question the credibility and honesty of paid collectors. Boman (Section 5.2.5), for example, said such persons are always suspect. if so, that judgement should also automatically apply to the collectors who found the S1a jaw and other Java Homo erectus fossils, all of which are completely accepted by the scientific community.
A more reasonable approach would be to separately evaluate the qualification of the collectors involved in particular discoveries. Lorenzo Parodi, the collector who worked for c. Ameghino at Miramar, Argentina, it may be recalled, left his discoveries in place for scientists to photograph in situ and excavate, and was not known to have engaged in any kind of deception over the course of a long career.
As we shall see in connection with the subsequent hominid finds reported by von Koenigswald, his Javanese collectors were often implicated in questionable behavior. therefore, we do not really know the exact place of discovery of the S1a jaw reportedly found at Kalijoso in 1936.
in addition, we must keep in mind that scientists themselves are not always honest. We shall explore this subject in some detail in chapter 8, which deals with the infamous piltdown incident.
At this