The Dubois collection: a new look at an old collection
J o h n de V o s
Vos, }. de. The Dubois collection: a new look at an old collection. In: Winkler Prins, C F . & Donovan,
S.K. (eds.), VII International Symposium 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences, Mining and Metallurgy: Libraries
- Archives - Museums': "Museums and their collections", Leiden (The Netherlands), 19-23 May 2003. Scripta
Geologic, Special Issue, 4: 267-285, 9 figs.; Leiden, August 2004.
J. de Vos, Department of Palaeontology, Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum Naturalis, P.O. Box
9517, NL-2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands ([email protected]).
Key words - Dubois, Pithecanthropus erectus, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens, Java.
One of the most exciting episodes of paleoanthropology was the find of the first transitional form, the
Pithecanthropus erectus, by the Dutchman Eugène Dubois in Java during 1891-1892. The history of
Dubois and his finds of the molar, skullcap and femur, forming his transitional form, are described.
Besides the human remains, Dubois made a large collection of vertebrate fossils, mostly of mammals,
now united in the so-called Dubois Collection. This collection played an important role in unravelling
the biostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy of Java. Questions, such as from where were those mammals coming, when did Homo erectus arrive in Java, and when did it become extinct, and when did
Homo sapiens reach Java, are discussed.
Contents
Introduction
267
E a r l y theories about the e v o l u t i o n of M a n
The role of D u b o i s (1858-1940) i n p a l e o a n t h r o p o l o g y ...
Important h o m i n i d sites of Java
The role of the D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n i n b i o s t r a t i g r a p h y
D i s p e r s a l of faunas i n southeast A s i a
The chronostratigraphy of Java
268
269
273
274
276
T i m e of a r r i v a l of Homo erectus a n d Homo sapiens i n Java
Conclusions
References
279
280
281
282
Introduction
The D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n of vertebrate fossils w a s m a d e b y E u g è n e D u b o i s i n the
f o r m e r N e t h e r l a n d s East Indies, n o w a d a y s Indonesia, at the e n d of the 19th century.
C l e e v e l y (1983) m e n t i o n e d i t as one of the m o s t f a m o u s p a l a e o n t o l o g i c a l collections
i n the w o r l d . Its i m p o r t a n c e lies m a i n l y i n a m o l a r , f e m u r a n d s k u l l c a p that were
attributed b y D u b o i s to a transitional f o r m n a m e d Pithecanthropus ( n o w Homo) erectus.
T h i s w a s the first h o m i n i d ever to be accepted as evidence f o r h u m a n e v o l u t i o n .
Therefore, the D u t c h p h y s i c i s t M a r i e Eugène François T h o m a s D u b o i s f o u n d e d , w i t h
his Pithecanthropus, p a l e o a n t h r o p o l o g y as a science i n 1891-1893 ( S h i p m a n & S t o r m ,
2002). A s s o c i a t e d w i t h the Pithecanthropus remains are tens of thousands of bones a n d
teeth of the Pleistocene vertebrate f a u n a of Indonesia. The vertebrate fossils a n d the
h o m i n i d remains were sent d u r i n g 1895-1900 to w h a t is n o w the N a t i o n a a l N a t u u r -
268
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol, Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
historisch M u s e u m , b u t w a s then the R i j k s m u s e u m v a n N a t u u r l i j k e H i s t o r i e at L e i d e n , The N e t h e r l a n d s .
A f t e r the f i n d of Pithecanthropus erectus (1891-1893) o n Java a n d a s i m i l a r h o m i n i d
(Sinanthropus pekinensis) i n C h i n a i n 1926 (Black, 1926), attention w a s focused o n A s i a
as the cradle of M a n k i n d i n the early part of the 20th century. In the 1960s the attent i o n shifted to A f r i c a , caused b y the f i n d s of older a n d m o r e ape-like h o m i n i d s (the
A u s t r a l o p i t h e c i n a e ) i n O l d u v a i a n d L a k e T u r k a n a . In the early 1980s a n e w interest
w a s focused o n the Javanese Homo erectus again, as a result of n e w interpretations of
the D u b o i s collection.
The general consensus n o w a d a y s c o n c e r n i n g the e v o l u t i o n of M a n is that i n A f r i c a
one of the A u s t r a l o p i t h e c i n a e gave rise to Homo ergaster. A b o u t 1.5 M a ago this species
m i g r a t e d to E u r a s i a . The descendants of Homo ergaster reached A s i a as Homo erectus.
The p u r p o s e of this paper is to give a historical s u r v e y of the role of D u b o i s i n
p a l e o a n t h r o p o l o g y , a n d to s h o w h o w the D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n served as a basis for the
debate o n the a r r i v a l a n d extinction of Homo erectus, a n d the a r r i v a l of Homo sapiens, i n
Java. These issues are closely related to the b i o - a n d chronostratigraphy of Java, a n d
f a u n a l dispersal i n southeast A s i a .
E a r l y theories about the e v o l u t i o n of M a n
T h e u n i s s e n & de V o s (1982), T h e u n i s s e n (1989), T h e u n i s s e n et al (1990), L e a k e y &
Slikkerveer (1993), S h i p m a n (2001) a n d de V o s (1985b, 2002) have described the story
of D u b o i s i n great d e t a i l . F o r a g o o d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the role of D u b o i s i n palaeoa n t h r o p o l o g i c a l research, a s u m m a r y is g i v e n here based o n de V o s (1985b, 2002).
A l t h o u g h the first finds of fossil h o m i n i d s started i n 1891, ideas about the e v o l u t i o n
of M a n started earlier. In 1844 Robert C h a m b e r s (1802-1871) p u b l i s h e d Vestiges of
Natural History of Creation, i n w h i c h he set out a d e v e l o p m e n t theory. C h a m b e r s d i d
not stress the point, b u t his d e v e l o p m e n t hypothesis clearly m a d e M a n a n i m m e d i a t e
descendant of the apes. The anatomist R i c h a r d O w e n (1855) u s e d his expertise to d i s p r o v e the theory of e v o l u t i o n at its most controversial point, M a n ' s l i n k w i t h the apes,
b y p o i n t i n g out that the h e a v y e y e b r o w s of the great apes w e r e m i s s i n g i n m o d e r n
M a n . A c c o r d i n g to O w e n , as e y e b r o w s are d e v e l o p e d i n d e p e n d e n t l y , a n d are not
i n f l u e n c e d b y internal or external factors, M a n m u s t have h a d h e a v y eyebrows, if M a n
descended f r o m the great apes; this is o b v i o u s l y not the case (Reader, 1981).
H o w e v e r , a s k u l l w i t h h e a v y e y e b r o w s w a s f o u n d i n 1856 i n the N e a n d e r t h a l near
Düsseldorf. The fossil came into the h a n d s of H e r m a n n Schaaffhausen, professor of
a n a t o m y at the U n i v e r s i t y of B o n n , w h o w a s c o n v i n c e d that the remains w e r e v e r y
o l d a n d h o m i n i d . T h e i r strange m o r p h o l o g y w a s caused b y d e f o r m a t i o n , b u t the
d o l i g o c e p h a l i c f o r m of the s k u l l w a s , a c c o r d i n g to Schaaffhausen, not comparable to
any m o d e r n race, e v e n not to the most 'barbaric'. The h e a v y eyebrows, characteristic
for great apes, were a c c o r d i n g to Schaaffhausen t y p i c a l for the N e a n d e r t h a l . The s k u l l
therefore m u s t have b e l o n g e d to a n o r i g i n a l w i l d race of n o r t h w e s t e r n E u r o p e . Some
e v e n considered it as the s k u l l of a n i d i o t , an O l d D u t c h m a n ' , or a Cossack.
In 1859 C h a r l e s D a r w i n p u b l i s h e d On the Origin of Species, i n w h i c h he set out a
theory of e v o l u t i o n , characterised b y a g r a d u a l d e v e l o p m e n t i n w h i c h n a t u r a l select i o n is the m e c h a n i s m . Others w e r e d r a w i n g the c o n c l u s i o n that there is n o separation
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol, Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
269
between M a n a n d apes. In this context the s k u l l of the N e a n d e r t h a l became a centre of
debate. T w o ideas d e v e l o p e d , w h i c h are still debated today; either N e a n d e r t h a l M a n
belongs to Recent M a n or N e a n d e r t h a l M a n is a species of its o w n . H u x l e y (1863) set
the tone of the d i s c u s s i o n b y d e s c r i b i n g the m o r p h o l o g i c a l characteristics of the N e a n derthal as p r i m i t i v e , yet definitely h u m a n . H e also p o i n t e d to the large b r a i n capacity
as p r o o f of the N e a n d e r t h a l ' s h u m a n nature (Theunissen et al, 1990). In contrast K i n g
(1864), professor of a n a t o m y at Q u e e n ' s C o l l e g e (Ireland), c o n s i d e r e d , w i t h o u t g i v i n g
scientific a r g u m e n t s , that N e a n d e r t h a l M a n w a s a n e w species a n d c a l l e d it Homo
Neanderthalensis. Later f i n d s , s u c h as the m a n d i b l e of L a N a u l e t t e (1866) a n d the S p y
skeletons (1887) n o w recognised as N e a n d e r t h a l s , were also u s u a l l y ascribed to a
(primitive) race of m o d e r n h u m a n s (Erickson, 1976).
D a r w i n (1871) discussed the p o s i t i o n of M a n i n e v o l u t i o n , but d i d so o n theoretical
g r o u n d s w i t h o u t u s i n g fossils to s u p p o r t his argument. F o r Ernst H a e c k e l ( a r o u n d
1887) fossils were not necessary as p r o o f that M a n took part i n the e v o l u t i o n , because
the process c o u l d be p r o v e n already b y a n a t o m y a n d e m b r y o l o g y . H e i n t r o d u c e d the
n a m e Pithecanthropus as a theoretical m i s s i n g l i n k b e t w e e n apes a n d M a n (Theunissen,
1989).
T h u s , none of the fossils f o u n d before 1887 w e r e considered proof that M a n took
part i n e v o l u t i o n . In that year Eugène D u b o i s sailed for the N e t h e r l a n d s East Indies i n
search of the m i s s i n g l i n k .
The role of Dubois (1858-1940) in paleoanthropology
M a r i e Eugène François T h o m a s D u bois (Fig. 1) w a s b o r n i n 1858, a year
before D a r w i n p u b l i s h e d h i s On the Origin of Species a n d t w o years after the
N e a n d e r t h a l s k u l l h a d been f o u n d . H e
g r e w u p i n a p e r i o d that w i t n e s s e d the
r a p i d acceptance a n d d i s s e m i n a t i o n of
the theory of e v o l u t i o n . I n the 1860s
a n d '70s the p r o b l e m of h u m a n ancestry
w a s central to m a n y discussions o n evol u t i o n a r y theory. U n t i l far into the '80s
opponents a n d adherents of a n e v o l u tionary ancestry for h u m a n s agreed that,
as yet, n o h o m i n i d fossils were k n o w n
that p r o v i d e d proof of h u m a n e v o l u tion. D u b o i s w a s a m o n g the first to
b r i n g about a change i n this climate of
o p i n i o n (Theunissen, 1989).
B o r n i n E i j s d e n i n the s o u t h of The
N e t h e r l a n d s , near St. Peter's M o u n t a i n
w h e r e the remains of a mosasaur w e r e
f o u n d i n 1780, D u b o i s h a d been interested i n palaeontology f r o m h i s early
Fig. 1. Eugène Dubois at the age of 70.
270
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
c h i l d h o o d . T h e G e r m a n anthropologist C a r l V o g t , w h o i n the late 1860s lectured i n
The N e t h e r l a n d s o n e v o l u t i o n a r y theory a n d h u m a n descent, p r o b a b l y encouraged
his interest i n p a l e o a n t h r o p o l o g y . F r o m 1877 to 1884 D u b o i s s t u d i e d m e d i c i n e at the
U n i v e r s i t y of A m s t e r d a m , w h e r e he became reader i n anatomy i n 1886. A l t h o u g h he
n o w seemed to be o n the b r i n k of a prosperous academic career, h i s p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r
p a l e o a n t h r o p o l o g y m a d e h i m decide to change course; m o r e a n d m o r e he became
possessed b y the i d e a of b e g i n n i n g a search f o r h o m i n i d fossils that m i g h t p r o v e
h u m a n e v o l u t i o n . F o l l o w i n g this call, he gave u p h i s p o s i t i o n at the u n i v e r s i t y a n d i n
1887 left for the N e t h e r l a n d s East Indies to b e g i n h i s search for the m i s s i n g l i n k .
B u t w h e r e to l o o k for? D u b o i s (1889) referred to D a r w i n , W a l l a c e a n d L y d e k k e r
to e x p l a i n this choice. I n h i s Descent of Man (1871) D a r w i n h a d reasoned that o u r
h u m a n ancestors m u s t have l i v e d i n the tropics, since h u m a n beings h a d lost their
f u r pelts i n the course of their d e v e l o p m e n t . H e suggested A f r i c a , w h e r e c h i m panzee a n d g o r i l l a live, as the most probable r e g i o n of h u m a n origins. W a l l a c e , o n the
other h a n d , h a d stressed the i m p o r t a n c e of s e a r c h i n g f o r the ancestors of presentd a y a n t h r o p o i d s i n caves a n d T e r t i a r y deposits i n b o t h A f r i c a a n d southeast A s i a .
L y d e k k e r (1879) h a d d e s c r i b e d a p r i m a t e f o s s i l , a n i n c o m p l e t e j a w w i t h a n u m b e r of
teeth, f r o m the S i w a l i k H i l l s i n B r i t i s h I n d i a , w h i c h seemed to t h r o w some l i g h t o n
h u m a n descent. A c c o r d i n g to L y d e k k e r , this primate, w h o m he n a m e d Palaeopithecus
sivaiensis, c o u l d be r e g a r d e d as a predecessor of the c h i m p a n z e e ( i n those d a y s p u t
i n the genus Anthropopithecus). Y e t , he a d d e d that the f o s s i l also s h o w e d resemblance to b o t h g i b b o n a n d h u m a n . D u b o i s c o n c l u d e d f r o m this that " t h e G i b b o n
g r o u p w h i c h i n earlier g e o l o g i c a l p e r i o d s h a d d e v e l o p e d f u r t h e r " m i g h t h a v e
p l a y e d a role i n h u m a n e v o l u t i o n (1889, p p . 160-161).
F o r D u b o i s the East Indies seemed a suitable area, the m o r e so because this c o l o n y
of T h e N e t h e r l a n d s l a y w i d e o p e n to h i m . T o p r o v i d e h i m s e l f w i t h a n income, he
j o i n e d the D u t c h East Indies A r m y as a m e d i c a l officer a n d i n December 1887 a r r i v e d
i n P a d a n g o n Sumatra. I n M a y 1888 he w a s seconded to P a j a k o m b o i n the P a d a n g
H i g h l a n d s , w h e r e he began to scout for caves suited for palaeontological excavations.
B y A u g u s t he h a d gathered proof that fossil m a m m a l s o c c u r r e d the caves of Sumatra.
T h e r e u p o n , the c o l o n i a l g o v e r n m e n t n o t o n l y enabled D u b o i s to dedicate a l l h i s time
to this search, b u t e v e n charged h i m to carry o u t palaeontological excavations o n
S u m a t r a a n d , if necessary, o n Java. T w o members of the a r m y engineering corps w e r e
assigned to h i s party, a l o n g w i t h fifty forced labourers to h e l p h i m w i t h the excavations.
The S u m a t r a n cave f a u n a s o o n p r o v e d too y o u n g to i n c l u d e a n y h u m a n forerunners. Therefore, i n 1890, D u b o i s d e c i d e d to continue h i s excavations o n Java,
w h e r e fossils of s u p p o s e d l y Tertiary age h a d already been f o u n d b y , a m o n g others,
J u n g h u h n (1857) a n d Radèn Saléh (1867). M o r e o v e r , i n 1888, the m i n i n g engineer B . D .
v a n Rietschoten h a d f o u n d a fossil s k u l l near the v i l l a g e of W a j a k o n Java w h i c h ,
t h o u g h f u l l y h u m a n , clearly d i f f e r e d f r o m the m o d e r n Javanese p o p u l a t i o n (Dubois,
1890). Java thus h e l d p r o m i s i n g prospects.
C a v e e x p l o r a t i o n i n Java p r o v e d u n r e w a r d i n g a n d D u b o i s n o w t u r n e d h i s attent i o n to the o p e n f i e l d . Success w a s almost i m m e d i a t e . I n N o v e m b e r 1890, near K e d u n g
L u m b u at K e d u n g B r u b u s i n the K e n d e n g H i l l s , he f o u n d a fragment of a m a n d i b l e
that he described as f o l l o w s : " A m i d s t the remains of t y p i c a l representatives of the
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
271
Fig. 2. Skull-cap of Homo erectus (Dubois, 1893).
fauna concerned, a n d i n the same layer
a h u m a n fossil w a s f o u n d , the right side of
the c h i n of a l o w e r j a w w i t h the sockets of the canine tooth a n d of the first a n d second
premolar.... [T]his fossil [jaw] forms a different a n d p r o b a b l y l o w e r type t h a n any prev i o u s l y k n o w n " (1891, pp.14-15).
In A u g u s t 1891, d u r i n g the second d i g g i n g season o n Java, D u b o i s b e g a n excavations at T r i n i l , a l o c a l i t y that w a s to acquire h i s t o r i c a l significance. A n e n o r m o u s
n u m b e r of vertebrate fossils were unearthed a n d i n September the first remains of a
p r i m a t e , a t h i r d m o l a r , e m e r g e d f r o m the sediments. A t first, D u b o i s ascribed the
fossil to a c h i m p a n z e e (Anthropopithecus). I n one of the reports to h i s superiors he
wrote: " T h i s genus of a n t h r o p o i d s , o c c u r r i n g o n l y i n West- a n d Central-equatorial
A f r i c a t o d a y , l i v e d i n B r i t i s h I n d i a i n the P l i o c e n e a n d , as w e c a n see f r o m this d i s covery, d u r i n g the later Pleistocene i n J a v a " (1892a, p p . 13-14).
The s k u l l c a p (Fig. 2) for w h i c h D u b o i s a c q u i r e d fame w a s unearthed i n October.
In the o p i n i o n of D u b o i s it w a s clearly distinguishable f r o m that of the o r a n g - u t a n
a n d the gorilla. It h a d to b e l o n g to the same fossil c h i m p a n z e e f r o m w h i c h a m o l a r
h a d b e e n f o u n d a m o n t h earlier. D e s p i t e h a v i n g d e s i g n a t e d the f i n d as a " c h i m panzee", D u b o i s w a s w e l l aware that he h a d m a d e a n i m p o r t a n t d i s c o v e r y . T h e
Javanese c r a n i u m w a s higher a n d larger than that of the recent c h i m p a n z e e a n d substantially m o r e h u m a n - l i k e than a n y k n o w n a n t h r o p o i d , w h e t h e r fossil or recent
(1892b, p p . 14-15).
In A u g u s t of the f o l l o w i n g year a t h i r d p r i m a t e fossil w a s d i s c o v e r e d , this time a n
almost completely preserved left femur. " T h i s t h i g h b o n e " , D u b o i s stated, " l a y at the
same l e v e l i n w h i c h b o t h the other parts were f o u n d , yet f o l l o w i n g the d i r e c t i o n of the
earlier stream w h i c h deposited the tuff material 15 m u p s t r e a m . F r o m the c i r c u m stances of the f i n d a n d [my] comparative research it is evident that the three skeletal
272
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
Fig. 3. Excavation at Trinil in 1900.
elements b e l o n g to one a n d the same i n d i v i d u a l , p r o b a b l y a v e r y aged f e m a l e " (1893,
p . 10). T h e a l m o s t perfectly h u m a n characteristics of the f e m u r i n d i c a t e d that the
i n d i v i d u a l m u s t have w a l k e d u p r i g h t a n d this i n d u c e d D u b o i s to christen h i s " c h i m p a n z e e " Anthropopithecus erectus. F u r t h e r , he stated: " I n v i e w of a l l three skeletal
elements, especially the femur, Anthropopithecus erectus E u g . D u b o i s approaches m o d e r n M a n m o r e closely than a n y of the three great apes, a fact w h i c h is i n h a r m o n y
w i t h the thesis of L a m a r c k , a n d later of D a r w i n a n d others, that the first step i n the
d i r e c t i o n of h u m a n i s a t i o n of o u r ancestors w a s the [acquisition of the] erect p o s i t i o n " .
A d d i t i o n a l investigation of the remains f i n a l l y c o n v i n c e d D u b o i s that they represented a n i n t e r m e d i a r y f o r m b e t w e e n h u m a n s a n d apes. H e therefore d e c i d e d that
instead of a ' m a n - a p e ' or Anthropopithecus, it w a s m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e to designate h i s
f i n d a n ' a p e - m a n ' , a Pithecanthropus (the n a m e c o i n e d b y Ernst H a e c k e l (1868) for the
h y p o t h e t i c a l l i n k b e t w e e n h u m a n s a n d fossil A p e s ) . I n 1894 D u b o i s p u b l i s h e d the
results of h i s studies u n d e r the title "Pithecanthropus erectus, eine menschenaehnliche
U e b e r g a n g s f o r m aus J a v a " .
O n e year later he r e t u r n e d to the N e t h e r l a n d s . H i s assistants c o n t i n u e d the systematic excavations u n t i l 1900 (Fig. 3). D u b o i s w i d e l y p u b l i c i s e d h i s Pithecanthropus
finds, a n d d i s p l a y e d t h e m at several international congresses a n d scientific meetings.
O p i n i o n s o n h i s d i s c o v e r y v a r i e d , b u t essentially the critics were d i v i d e d into t w o
camps. Some gave the Pithecanthropus remains the same treatment the N e a n d e r t h a l
fossils h a d received forty years earlier; they r e g a r d e d t h e m as p r i m i t i v e , t h o u g h f u l l y
h u m a n . Others, h o w e v e r , ascribed the bones to a n ( u p r i g h t - w a l k i n g ) ape. D u b o i s
(1896) d i d not fail to exploit this difference of o p i n i o n . H e p o i n t e d o u t that for some of
his colleagues the fossils were apparently too p r i m i t i v e to be r e g a r d e d as h u m a n ,
w h i l e for others they w e r e too h u m a n - l i k e to be assigned to a n ape. C o n s e q u e n t l y ,
Pithecanthropus m u s t have been s o m e t h i n g i n between.
A f t e r D u b o i s h a d clarified several points a n d especially d u r i n g congresses, h e l d
f r o m 1894 to 1900, w h e r e they h a d b e e n able to examine the fossils for themselves, a
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
273
g r o w i n g n u m b e r of scientists r e c o g n i s e d that they w e r e d e a l i n g w i t h a t r a n s i t i o n a l
f o r m l i n k i n g h u m a n s w i t h their a p e - l i k e ancestors. T h u s , they accepted D u b o i s ' s
belief that a p h y l o g e n e t i c significance c o u l d be ascribed to the fossils. M o s t of t h e m
d i d not agree w i t h D u b o i s ' c o n t e n t i o n that Pithecanthropus s t o o d exactly h a l f w a y
b e t w e e n h u m a n a n d ape. T h e y relegated h i m to a n extinct side b r a n c h of h u m a n
e v o l u t i o n , for instance, or they t h o u g h t that he h a d b e e n m u c h closer to Homo sapiens t h a n D u b o i s w a s p r e p a r e d to a l l o w . The c r u c i a l factor is, h o w e v e r , that they
s h o w e d themselves r e a d y to a d o p t a n e v o l u t i o n i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , m e a n i n g that for
the first t i m e a g r o u p of researchers a c k n o w l e d g e d a f o s s i l h o m i n i d as a t r a n s i t i o n a l
f o r m (Theunissen, 1989).
F r o m that m o m e n t o n the search for m o r e of s u c h fossils started. First there were
discoveries i n A f r i c a (Dart, 1925) a n d C h i n a (Black, 1926) before n e w f i n d s w e r e
reported f r o m Java.
I m p o r t a n t h o m i n i d sites of Java
Fig. 4. Map of Java, showing
J2 !
6
J2!l_
the important hominid sites.
D u b o i s ' s excavations at Java s h o w e d that Homo erectus w a s present i n T r i n i l ,
K e d u n g B r u b u s i n the K e n d e n g H i l l s , whereas Homo sapiens w a s f o u n d i n W a j a k (Fig.
4). In 1932, the D u t c h geologist W . F . F . O p p e n o o r t h described n e w h o m i n i d f i n d s f r o m
the v i l l a g e of N g a n d o n g o n the b a n k s of the Solo R i v e r . The site, a river terrace some
20 m above sea level, h a d already been m e n t i o n e d b y Elbert (1907) a n d t u r n e d out to
be a r i c h deposit of fossil vertebrates, i n c l u d i n g eleven s k u l l s of a n e w h o m i n i d .
O p p e n o o r t h (1932) subsequently described this h o m i n i d as Homo soloensis.
G u s t a v H e i n r i c h R a l p h v o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1902-1982), w h o f o l l o w e d i n the footsteps of D u b o i s , w a s of tremendous i m p o r t a n c e for p a l a e o a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l a n d b i o stratigraphical research i n Java. In 1930, v i a his professor of palaeontology F. B r o i l i ,
v o n K o e n i g s w a l d w a s offered the post of vertebrate palaeontologist of the D u t c h G e o logical S u r v e y o n Java, a n d he g l a d l y accepted this chance to go to southeast A s i a .
A l r e a d y i n 1931 he p u b l i s h e d his first attempt to date the f a u n a f r o m the ' T r i n i l beds'
(1931), w h e r e D u b o i s h a d d i s c o v e r e d the Pithecanthropus. A s early as M a r c h 1936 v o n
K o e n i g s w a l d w a s able to announce the f i n d of 'the c h i l d f r o m M o j o k e r t o ' (Fig. 5), East
Java, w h i c h he w a s sure b e l o n g e d to Pithecanthropus.
V o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1940) collected a lot of h o m i n i d fossils i n a n area called Sangiran. The p r o b l e m w i t h this area is that there are outcrops of several different f o r m a tions. A s almost a l l h o m i n i d fossils are i n c i d e n t a l surface f i n d s , it is not k n o w n f r o m
w h i c h f o r m a t i o n they o r i g i n a t e d .
274
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
Fig. 5. Skull of the child from
Mojokerto.
V o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1939, 1940) also s a m p l e d t w o fissure f i l l i n g s near P u n u n g
(Java), w h i c h y i e l d e d a fauna consisting o n l y of dental elements f r o m w h i c h the most
part of the roots w a s g n a w e d b y p o r c u p i n e s . B a d o u x (1959, p . 127) noted that v o n
K o e n i g s w a l d h a d t o l d h i m that the " P u n u n g C o l l e c t i o n " material o r i g i n a t e d f r o m t w o
localities, P u n u n g I near M e n d o l o K i d u l a n d P u n u n g II near T a b u h a n . In the collect i o n there w a s a h o m i n i d dental element, w h i c h w a s considered b y v o n K o e n i g s w a l d
as cf. Pithecanthropus erectus. H a l f of the P u n u n g collection is n o w a d a y s i n the N a t i o n aal N a t u u r h i s t o r i s c h M u s e u m , the other half is i n the Senckenberg M u s e u m (Frankfurt, G e r m a n y ) .
The t y p i c a l preservation of the P u n u n g fauna can also be observed i n the material
D u b o i s collected f r o m the S u m a t r a n C a v e s d u r i n g 1887-1888. L a r g e n u m b e r s of fossils
were f o u n d here, but, l i k e i n P u n u n g , they consist o n l y of dental elements f r o m w h i c h
the most part of the roots is g n a w e d b y p o r c u p i n e s . The S u m a t r a n collection contains
a f e w dental elements of a h o m i n i d , w h i c h w e r e attributed to Homo sapiens b y H o o i j e r
(1948). The close resemblance b e t w e e n the t w o faunas l e d to the conclusions that the
m o l a r s i d e n t i f i e d as cf. Pithecanthropus erectus b y v o n K o e n i g s w a l d s h o u l d also be
attributed to Homo sapiens (de V o s , 1983). So, T r i n i l , K e d u n g B r u b u s , Sangiran, N g a n d o n g a n d M o j o k e r t o w i t h Homo erectus, a n d P u n u n g a n d W a j a k w i t h Homo sapiens, are
i m p o r t a n t sites for the d i s c u s s i o n c o n c e r n i n g the a r r i v a l a n d extinction of Homo erectus
a n d the a r r i v a l Homo sapiens i n Java.
T h e r o l e of the D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n i n b i o s t r a t i g r a p h y
V o n K o e n i g s w a l d ' s official task at the Geological Survey w a s to p r o v i d e a d i v i s i o n
of the terrestrial deposits of Java o n the basis of fossil m a m m a l s . In 1934 he p u b l i s h e d
his biostratigraphy, but stressed that he w o u l d o n l y give a s u m m a r y of his results a n d
that these h a d to be regarded as p r e l i m i n a r y . V o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1934, 1935) based his
biostratigraphy o n ' g u i d e fossils' a n d distinguished, f r o m the h o m i n i d - b e a r i n g deposits
mentioned above, the f o l l o w i n g faunas f r o m o l d to y o u n g ; Jetis (Early Pleistocene),
T r i n i l w i t h Homo erectus ( M i d d l e Pleistocene) a n d N g a n d o n g w i t h Homo soloensis (Late
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
275
Pleistocene). V o n K o e n i g s w a l d w a s convinced, o n the basis of the guide fossils of the
Jetis fauna f o u n d i n the Mojokerto area, that the s k u l l of the c h i l d w a s d e r i v e d f r o m an
older layer than the T r i n i l finds of D u b o i s (von K o e n i g s w a l d , 1936a). Unfortunately, as
he stated himself, the s k u l l i n question w a s a surface f i n d . D u b o i s (1936) contested the
age p r o p o s e d b y v o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1936a, b). The age of the Mojokerto s k u l l has been i n
the centre of later discussions, a n d is as yet still unresolved.
V o n K o e n i g s w a l d considered the fossil assemblage f r o m P u n u n g to be a T r i n i l
fauna, of M i d d l e Pleistocene age, a n d i n c l u d e d it i n the faunal list of T r i n i l . T o v o n
K o e n i g s w a l d it was logical to identify the h o m i n i d i n the P u n u n g fauna as cf. Pithecanthropus erectus, since the species w a s also f o u n d i n T r i n i l . B a d o u x (1959) gave a f u l l
description of the P u n u n g fauna, w i t h the exception of the h o m i n i d specimens. H e considered the age of the P u n u n g fauna to be younger than the T r i n i l fauna, but older than
the N g a n d o n g fauna. H o w e v e r , he still placed the fauna i n the M i d d l e Pleistocene.
The classic Pleistocene vertebrate biostratigraphy of the i s l a n d Java (Jetis, T r i n i l
a n d N g a n d o n g ) as established b y v o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1933, 1934,1935, 1940, 1956) w a s
p a r t l y based o n composite faunas (de V o s et al., 1982). A l t h o u g h v o n K o e n i g s w a l d
u s e d locality names for his f a u n a l units, some of the f a u n a l assemblages f r o m l o c a l i ties i n c l u d e d i n these units differed m a r k e d l y f r o m those collected at the 'type l o c a l i ties'. Besides l u m p i n g faunas, v o n K o e n i g s w a l d also changed the f a u n a l lists c o m p i l e d b y p r e v i o u s authors, w i t h o u t any clear argumentation.
Nevertheless,
von
K o e n i g s w a l d ' s biostratigraphy w o u l d p r o v i d e a standard for m o r e than forty years,
a n d has p r o v i d e d a n i n v a l u a b l e g u i d e for a l l subsequent research i n Java. H o w e v e r ,
n e w research revealed its serious deficiencies (de V o s et al., 1982).
Beside the h o m i n i d fossils, D u b o i s h a d collected more than 20,000 vertebrate fossils,
mostly m a m m a l s , f r o m different sites, like T r i n i l a n d K e d u n g Brubus, f r o m 1891 u n t i l
1900 (Fig. 6). The fossils came to The Netherlands a n d were stored at several places f r o m
1900 to 1940 (Holthuis, 1995). Scientifically these a n i m a l remains were clearly considered
inferior to the all-important h o m i n i d fossils, a n d thus received v e r y little attention. D r .
J.J.A. Bernsen catalogued the collection i n the '30s (Brongersma, 1941). This gave D r . D . A .
Hooijer, former curator of the D u b o i s Collection, the opportunity to describe the fauna
f r o m the Sumatran caves a n d the fossils f r o m Java i n detail (e.g. Hooijer, 1946a,b, 1947,
1948, 1957, 1958, 1960, 1962). So, f r o m every specimen f r o m a particular site, the taxon
became k n o w n . Hooijer d i d n ' t use the fossils i n a biostratigraphic w a y . H o w e v e r , his taxonomical w o r k made it possible to study the faunal composition of the h o m i n i d 'type
localities'. It was the starting point for a n e w l o o k at the o l d collection.
In the early 80s of the last century a joint D u t c h (Utrecht U n i v e r s i t y a n d the
N a t i o n a a l N a t u u r h i s t o r i s c h M u s e u m , L e i d e n ) a n d Indonesian (Geological
Research
a n d D e v e l o p m e n t Centre) team started to interpret the f a u n a l succession u s i n g o n l y
faunas f r o m sites of w h i c h the stratigraphical context w a s k n o w n . The D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n y i e l d e d the data for the sites at T r i n i l a n d K e d u n g B r u b u s (de V o s & Sondaar,
1982). The authors c o n c l u d e d that the T r i n i l H a u p t K n o c h e n Schicht ( H . K . ) fauna, the
layer f r o m w h i c h the Pithecanthropus erectus of D u b o i s originated, w a s older than the
one f r o m K e d u n g B r u b u s . The latter fauna w a s i n their o p i n i o n of the same age as the
Jetis fauna of v o n K o e n i g s w a l d , w h i c h h a d y i e l d e d Pithecanthropus modjokertensis (=
Homo erectus). T h i s w a s a remarkable conclusion, as the c h i l d of M o j o k e r t o h a d a l w a y s
been considered to be older than the Homo erectus f r o m T r i n i l . A f t e r c o m p a r i n g the
276
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
Fig. 6. The enormous amount of fossils on the veranda of Dubois' house in Pajakombo, Java.
fauna f r o m P u n u n g w i t h the S u m a t r a n caves material de V o s (1983) c o n c l u d e d
those faunas are s i m i l a r i n f a u n a l c o m p o s i t i o n a n d age, a n d suggested that
h o m i n i d dental elements f r o m P u n u n g b e l o n g e d to Homo sapiens, l i k e the ones
the S u m a t r a n caves. C o m p a r i s o n of b o t h faunas w i t h the W a j a k fauna s h o w e d
those faunas were intermediate i n age i n between N g a n d o n g a n d Wajak.
that
the
from
that
The n e w a p p r o a c h l e d i n a series of papers (Sondaar et al, 1983; Sondaar 1984;
Sondaar & de V o s , 1984; L e i n d e r s , 1985; de V o s , 1985a; A z i z & de V o s , 1989; A z i z & de
V o s , 1989; T h e u n i s s e n et al, 1990), a n d u l t i m a t e l y to a r e v i s i o n of the f a u n a succession
as p r o p o s e d b y v o n K o e n i g s w a l d a n d to a n e w biostratigraphy for Java, w h i c h r u n s
f r o m o l d to y o u n g for the h o m i n i d sites: T r i n i l H . K . , K e d u n g B r u b u s , N g a n d o n g ,
P u n u n g a n d Wajak. T w o earlier faunas were also d i s t i n g u i s h e d , n a m e l y a n i s l a n d
fauna (Satir) a n d a n i m p o v e r i s h e d T r i n i l F a u n a ( C i Saat) (Fig. 7).
D i s p e r s a l o f f a u n a s i n southeast A s i a
A t the same time i n the early 1980s a n e w interest came u p about the o r i g i n of the
faunas of Java. H a v i n g established w h e n the v a r i o u s faunas i n h a b i t e d the i s l a n d , the
question of their o r i g i n a n d reasons for f a u n a l turnovers became part of the research
p r o g r a m m e . I n the past there w e r e already speculations about the o r i g i n of the
Indonesian fauna. M a r t i n (1884), w h o described some of Java's first recovered fossils,
interpreted the m a m m a l remains as descendants of a n ancient I n d i a n stock. D u b o i s
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
277
Fig. 7. Biostratigraphy of Java after de Vos (1995). The symbols of animals represent new arrivals.
(1908) recognised the continental a n d specifically I n d i a n character of extinct m a m m a l s
of Java. M o l e n g r a a f f (1922) suggested a d i s p e r s a l route west, not east, of S u m a t r a .
F r o m B u r m a , f o l l o w i n g the A n d a m a n a n d N i c o b a r Islands, the islands west of S u m a tra c o u l d have received f a u n a l elements f r o m B u r m a . Later, R e n s c h (1936) p r o p o s e d
that some species c o u l d h a v e e v e n reached Java f o l l o w i n g this route. The islands west
of S u m a t r a as w e l l as the N i c o b a r s a n d A n d a m a n s f o r m the e x p o s e d parts of a c o n t i n u o u s r i d g e , m o s t l y s u b m a r i n e , w h i c h can be traced f r o m the A r a k a n Y o m a i n B u r m a ,
a l o n g the west coast of S u m a t r a a n d Java. M o r e of the r i d g e c o u l d have been exposed
i n Pliocene a n d Pleistocene times. The u n c e r t a i n t o p o g r a p h y , d i f f i c u l t terrain a n d
h e a v y o v e r g r o w t h of the islands present major obstacles for f i e l d w o r k a n d none of the
islands has so-far p r o d u c e d remains of a n ancient l a n d fauna.
In the 1990s the f a u n a of the Javanese sites w e r e g r o u p e d i n clear f a u n a l associations (de V o s , 1996; Sondaar et al., 1996). The h o m i n i d sites s h o w e d a clear b i p a r t i t i o n
i n the f a u n a f r o m the localities w i t h Homo erectus a n d those c o n t a i n i n g Homo sapiens.
The sites w i t h Homo erectus y i e l d e d the Stegodon-Homo erectus f a u n a association. The
faunas f r o m the h o m i n i d sites T r i n i l , K e d u n g B r u b u s a n d N g a n d o n g are attributed to
this f a u n a l association, characterised b y archaic f a u n a l elements l i k e the p r o b o s c i d e a n
Stegodon a n d Homo erectus. It clearly s h o w s affinities w i t h the f a u n a l association f r o m
the I n d i a n Subcontinent (the S i w a l i k s ) a n d B u r m a . F i v e species a n d one genus have a
direct relation w i t h the f a u n a of the S i w a l i k s , v i z . , Hexaprotodon sivalensis, Hyaena brevirostris, Caprolagus cf. sivalensis, Homotherium ultimum, Nestor itherium cf. sivalense, a n d
the genus Megantereon. Three species are closely related to S i w a l i k species, v i z . , Stegodon
trigonocephalus w i t h Stegodon ganesa, Elephas husudrindicus w i t h Elephas hysudricus a n d
Duboisia santeng w i t h the B o s e l a p h i n i . D e V o s (1995, 1996) c o n c l u d e d that the
278
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
Fig. 8. The migration of mammals during the Early-Middle Pleistocene via the Siva-Malayan route
(after de Vos, 1995).
Stegodon-Homo erectus fauna association o r i g i n a t e d f r o m the S i w a l i k s (the I n d i a n subcontinent) a n d reached Java v i a the so-called S i v a - M a l a y a n Route (Fig. 8).
A t the e n d of the M i d d l e Pleistocene the Stegodon-Homo erectus fauna association
became extinct. A f a u n a l t u r n o v e r took place a n d a n e w fauna m i g r a t e d into the
Indonesian A r c h i p e l a g o ; the Pongo-Homo sapiens fauna to w h i c h the site P u n u n g is
attributed, as w e l l as the material f r o m the S u m a t r a n caves. I n this fauna w e f i n d the
I n d i a n elephant (Elephas maximus), o r a n g - u t a n (Pongo pygmaeus), the g i b b o n (Hylobates
syndactylus), the p i g - t a i l e d M a c a q u e {Macaca nemestrina) a n d the M a l a y a n bear (Ursus
malayanus), a l l species w h i c h are still extant o n the continent o r i n other places of the
Indonesian A r c h i p e l a g o , b u t are n o longer f o u n d o n Java. The large quantity of o r a n g u t a n a n d the presence of other primates indicate a h u m i d t r o p i c a l rainforest e n v i r o n ment. S i m i l a r faunas w i t h o r a n g - u t a n {Pongo pygmaeus) are also f o u n d i n fossil sites of
the continent, l i k e V i e t n a m ( L a n g T r a n g Cave), C a m b o d i a ( P h n o m L o a n g ) , a n d C h i n a
(de V o s 1984, V u the L o n g et al, 1996).
Based o n the balanced character of the faunas of P u n u n g a n d Sumatra, a n d the fact
that w e are d e a l i n g w i t h a tropical rainforest, w h i c h cannot cross a water barrier, w e
m a y assume that the connection w i t h the m a i n l a n d became more continuous. Probably
between 126,000 a n d 81,000 years ago (Storm, 2001) there w a s such a l o w e r i n g of the sea
level, w h i c h connected Sumatra, Java a n d K a l i m a n t a n (the S u n d a shelf) to the continent.
In that p e r i o d there w a s an i m m i g r a t i o n of a tropical rainforest fauna w i t h Homo sapiens
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
279
Fig. 9. The migration of mammals during the Late Pleistocene via the Sino-Malayan route (after de
Vos, 1995).
f r o m C h i n a , v i a V i e t n a m , C a m b o d i a , the M a l a y Peninsula to the S u n d a shelf (de V o s &
L o n g , 2001). Based o n the presence of orang-utan a n d other elements of the fauna de
V o s (1995), v a n d e n B e r g h et al (1996,) a n d de V o s et al (1999) d e d u c e d that the fauna
f r o m Sumatran Caves, N i a h (Kalimantan) a n d P u n u n g (Java) came f r o m South C h i n a
d u r i n g the Late Pleistocene, v i a the so-called S i n o - M a l a y a n route (Fig. 9).
The chronostratigraphy of Java
The f a u n a l succession gives a g o o d i d e a about the relative age of the faunas, b u t i n
order to m a k e correlations w i t h m a i n l a n d faunas, it is better to have t h e m i n a
chronostratigraphic f r a m e w o r k . F r o m the 1960s this p r o b l e m has been tackled b y
m e t h o d s of absolute d a t i n g . R a d i o m e t r i c ages have been r e p o r t e d for v a r i o u s l i t h o l o g ie units a n d tektites i n Java. M a n y of these dates, h o w e v e r , are contradictory a n d conf u s i n g w h e n a p p l i e d to the d a t i n g of v a r i o u s geologic a n d palaeontologic events.
V o n K o e n i g s w a l d (1964,1968) p u b l i s h e d t w o p o t a s s i u m / a r g o n ( K / A r ) dates. T h e
first w a s based o n a ' t y p i c a l T r i n i l ' fauna w i t h the age of 495,000 ± 100 to 60,000 y r ; the
second o n a tektite f r o m the T r i n i l layers at Sangiran, w h i c h w a s 730,000 ± 50,000 y r .
V o n K o e n i g s w a l d s u p p o s e d the first date represented the age of the u p p e r T r i n i l .
Jacob & C u r t i s (1971) gave a p r e l i m i n a r y K / A r d a t i n g for early h u m a n s i n Java. A
s a m p l e f r o m M o j o k e r t o gave a result of 1.9 ± 0.4 M a . A c c o r d i n g to C u r t i s (1981),
280
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
h o w e v e r , the date is of little v a l u e d u e to the v e r y h i g h atmospheric-acid content of
the sample. N o consensus w a s reached o n the interpretation of these K / A r dates of
about t w o M a for the Jetis beds. V o n K o e n i g s w a l d h e l d the o p i n i o n that the date for
M o j o k e r t o is ' g o o d for the u p p e r Jetis o n l y ' (1975, p . 306), b u t others m a i n t a i n e d that
the t w o dates represent m a x i m a a n d that the average of the Jetis vertebrate f a u n a is
closer to 1 M a (e.g., Isaac & P i l b e a m , 1975).
In a s u r v e y of the available literature, O r c h i s t o n & Siesser (1982) reported that
r a d i o m e t r i c approaches i n v o l v i n g the K / A r m e t h o d have been p o p u l a r attempts to
date the fossil h o m i n i d b e a r i n g formations i n Java. Yet i n their v i e w , most of the a v a i l able dates are inadequate. F e w were reported i n detail, some w e r e p u b l i s h e d w i t h o u t
s t a n d a r d deviations, a n d a l l of t h e m l a c k e d adequate stratigraphie i n f o r m a t i o n .
In 1975, as the U n i v e r s i t y of T o k y o a n d the G e o l o g i c a l Survey of Indonesia became
equally convinced of the importance a n d necessity of a project for u n r a v e l l i n g the bio-,
litho - a n d chronostratigraphy of the h o m i n i d - b e a r i n g deposits of Java, they agreed to
p l a n a n d i m p l e m e n t a joint research project. The team concentrated o n Sangiran, where
most of the h o m i n i d s were c o m i n g f r o m , a n d w a s the first to carry out large-scale systematic excavations i n a l l fossil beds i n this area. The project w a s carried out i n the years
1976 u n t i l 1979 (Watanabe & K a d a r , 1985). A b r o a d spectrum of approaches w a s foll o w e d , i n c l u d i n g petrologic a n d magnetostratigraphic investigations; fluorine analyses
of bones, antlers a n d teeth of fossil m a m m a l s ; p o l l e n analysis; a n d fission track dating,
all conducted u n d e r controlled stratigraphie conditions. In the Sangiran area several tuff
layers c o u l d be d i s t i n g u i s h e d a n d dated ( S u z u k i et al, 1985). The fauna succession as
suggested b y the Dutch-Indonesian team, based o n the D u b o i s Collection, fits the
results of the excavations of the Indonesian-Japanese team (Watanabe & K a d a r , 1985).
Leinders et al. (1985) correlated the faunas w i t h the Indonesian-Japanese dates, a n d also
based o n Shutler et al. (2004) a n d S t o r m (2001), the f o l l o w i n g ages for the h o m i n i d sites
were obtained (Fig. 4):
The W a j a k fauna b e t w e e n 12,930-12,140 years (Shutler et al., 2004).
Wajak M a n between 7,670-7,210 years (Shutler et al, 2004).
The P u n u n g f a u n a m u s t have a n age about 81,000-126,000 years (Storm, 2001).
The N g a n d o n g f a u n a is considered to be y o u n g e r than the K e d u n g B r u b u s fauna
(Leinders et al, 1985).
The K e d u n g B r u b u s F a u n a is considered about 0.8 M a (Leinders et al, 1985).
The T r i n i l H . K . a n d C i Saat faunas are b e t w e e n 1 a n d 1.2 M a (Leinders et al, 1985).
T i m e of a r r i v a l of Homo erectus a n d Homo sapiens i n Java
T w o m a i n theories have been p u t forth to e x p l a i n m o d e r n h u m a n origins, the
M u l t i r e g i o n a l E v o l u t i o n M o d e l a n d the O u t of A f r i c a theory. The M u l t i r e g i o n a l E v o l u t i o n M o d e l ( W o l p o f f et al, 1984), proposes that Homo erectus m i g r a t e d f r o m A f r i c a to
E u r a s i a about 1.5 M a ago a n d gave rise to m o d e r n h u m a n s i n v a r i o u s regions of the
O l d W o r l d over a l o n g p e r i o d of time. The result is the e v o l u t i o n of a single, w i d e spread species, Homo sapiens, w h i c h preserves specific r e g i o n a l traits. I n this m o d e l , i n
Java, Homo erectus gave rise, v i a N g a n d o n g M a n a n d W a j a k M a n , to the Recent A u s tralian aboriginals {Homo sapiens). S t o r m (1995) s h o w e d , based o n the W a j a k s k u l l i n
the D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n , that this scenario is not v a l u a b l e for Java.
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
281
The second O u t of A f r i c a theory (Stringer, 1992), suggests that after Homo erectus
left A f r i c a a r o u n d 1.5 M a ago a n d d i s p e r s e d over T h e O l d W o r l d , Homo sapiens d e v e l o p e d about 150,000 years ago also i n A f r i c a a n d also dispersed over the O l d W o r l d . In
this scenario Homo sapiens replaced archaic h o m i n i d p o p u l a t i o n s (Homo erectus)
t h r o u g h o u t the O l d W o r l d .
The u n g o i n g debate about the a r r i v a l a n d extinction of Homo erectus i n Java is concentrated a r o u n d t w o r a d i o m e t r i c dates (Swisher et al, 1994, 1996). F o r the a r r i v a l
S w i s h e r et al (1994) c l a i m e d that Homo erectus w a s already present o n Java at 1.81 +
0.04 M a , based o n d a t i n g of minerals f r o m the s u p p o s e d site of the M o j o k e r t o c h i l d .
T h i s date is m u c h o l d e r t h a n the s u p p o s e d 1.5 M a of the Homo erectus ( O H - 9 ) f r o m
A f r i c a a n d is i n contrast w i t h the date for the K e d u n g B r u b u s fauna of about 800,000
b y L e i n d e r s et al (1985). D e V o s & Sondaar (1994) d i s p u t e d the d a t i n g of S w i s h e r et al
(1994) based o n the lack of a s o l i d lithostratigraphy as w a s g i v e n b y the JapaneseIndonesian team. T h i s team h a d c o n c l u d e d that at 1.8 M a Java w a s still b e l o w water
level (de V o s & Sondaar 1994). If the date of 1.8 M a is true, Homo erectus m u s t have
m i g r a t e d f r o m A f r i c a m u c h earlier t h a n the general accepted 1.5 M a . S w i s h e r et al
(1994) suggested that the ancestor of Homo erectus v e n t u r e d o u t of A f r i c a before 1.5
(probably 1.8 M a ) , a n d that a second m i g r a t i o n of Homo ergaster f o l l o w e d at a r o u n d
1.5 M a .
F o r the extinction S w i s h e r et al. (1996) c l a i m e d a v e r y y o u n g date (27,000 ± 2,000
years ago) based o n fossil b o v i d teeth f r o m N g a n d o n g . These dates are, a c c o r d i n g to
S w i s h e r et al (1996), s u r p r i s i n g l y y o u n g a n d , if p r o v e n correct, i m p l y that Homo erectus persisted m u c h longer i n Southeast A s i a t h a n elsewhere i n the w o r l d , i n d i c a t i n g
that Homo erectus existed beside Homo sapiens. I n this case the M u l t i r e g i o n a l M o d e l
doesn't stand. A c c o r d i n g to the D u t c h - I n d o n e s i a n team these dates are i n d e e d too
y o u n g . T h e P u n u n g fauna w i t h o r a n g - u t a n a n d Homo sapiens h a d a n age between
81,000-126,000 years a n d w a s y o u n g e r than N g a n d o n g fauna i n c l u d i n g N g a n d o n g
M a n . If the data of S w i s h e r et al (1996) are correct than one w o u l d expect a m i x e d
fauna consisting of Homo erectus, archaic f a u n a l elements (like the p r o b o s c i d e a n Stegodon) a n d Recent f a u n a l elements (like Pongo) w i t h Homo sapiens. H o w e v e r , this is n o t
the case; there are o n l y archaic f a u n a l elements i n N g a n d o n g .
The question is " w h a t is the v a l u e of those absolute dates". A n y w a y , the debate
w i l l continue for some years.
Conclusion
The D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n o w n s its fame as a n i m p o r t a n t part of c u l t u r a l heritage to
the f a m o u s s k u l l c a p a n d f e m u r that gave the first p h y s i c a l p r o o f of a transitional f o r m
between apes a n d M a n . T h e r e m a i n d e r of the fossils i n i t i a l l y received little attention
and w e r e stored f r o m 1900 till about 1940 at several places. M u c h progress w a s m a d e
i n the s t u d y of fossil m a n o n Java as n e w f i n d s w e r e m a d e i n the 1930s. O t h e r vertebrates w e r e considered of m i n o r importance, a l t h o u g h v o n K o e n i g s w a l d u s e d t h e m
for a first biostratigraphical scheme.
The role of the D u b o i s collection w a s restricted to the h o m i n i d fossils, u n t i l
Bernsen started cataloguing the other fossil material, after w h i c h H o o i j e r started the
task of systematic descriptions. T h i s w o r k set stage for a n e w role for the collection.
282
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
These vertebrate remains p r o v i d e d n e w a n d v a l u a b l e insights i n the b i o s t r a t i g r a p h y
of the r e g i o n . Secondly, they a l l o w e d the reconstruction of the ecological changes i n
southeast A s i a . T h u s , the D u b o i s C o l l e c t i o n got a n e w life, a n d p r o v i d e d the basis for
e v o l u t i o n a r y scenarios c o n c e r n i n g the d i s p e r s a l of Homo erectus a n d Homo sapiens.
References
Aziz, F. & Vos, J. de. 1989. Rediscovery of the Wadjak Site (Java, Indonesia). Journal of the Anthropological Society of Nippon, 97:133­144.
Aziz, F., Sondaar, P.Y., Leinders, J.J.M. & J. de Vos, J. de. 1989. Fossil faunas and early Man of Java.
Publication of the Geological Research and Development Centre, Paleontology series, 6:1­3.
Badoux, D . M . 1959. Fossil Mammals from two Fissure Deposits at Punung (Java). Kemink en Zoon N.V.,
Utrecht: 151 pp.
Bergh, G.D. van den, Vos, J. de, Sondaar, P.Y. & Aziz, F. 1996. Pleistocene Zoogeographie...evolution of
Java (Indonesia) and Glacio­Eustatic sea level fluctuations: a backg round for the presence of
Homo. Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association Bulletin, 14 (Chiang Mai Papers, Volume 1): 7­21.
Black, D. 1926. Tertiairy man in Asia: The Chou Kou Tien discovery. Nature, 118: 733­734.
Brongersma, L.D. 1941. De verzameling van Indische Fossielen (Collectie­Dubois). De Indische Gids,
1941 (Maart): 97­116.
Chambers, R. 1844. Vestiges of Natural History of Creation. J. Churchill, London: 231 pp.
Cleevely, R.J. 1983. World Palaeontological Collections. British Museum (Natural History), London: 365
pp.
Curtis, G . H . 1981. Establishing a relevant time scale in anthropological and archaeolog ical research.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B, 292: 7­20.
Dart, R. 1925. Australopithecus africanus: The Man­Ape of South Africa. Nature, 115:195­199.
Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured
Races in th e Struggle for Life. John Murray, London: 490 pp.
Darwin, C. 1871. The descent of man and selection of relation to sex. John Murray, London: 475 pp.
Dubois, E. 1889. Over de wenschelijkheid van een onderzoek naar diluviale fauna van Ned. Indie, in
het bijzonder van Sumatra. Natuurkundig Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch-Indië, 48:148­165.
Dubois, E. 1890. Uit een schrijven van den Heer Dubois te Pajacombo naar aanleiding van een aan
dien Heer toeg ezonden schedel, door den Heer van Rietschoten in zijn marmerg roeven in het
Kedirische opgegraven. Natuurkundig Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch Indie, 49: 209­210.
Dubois, E. 1891.Palaeontologische onderzoekingen op Java. Extra bijvoegsel der Javasche Courant, Verslag
van het Mijnwezen over het 4e kwartaal 1890:14­18.
Dubois, E. 1892a. Palaeontologische onderzoekingen op Java. Extra bijvoegsel der Javasche Courant, Verslag
van het Mijnwezen over het 3e kwartaal 1891:12­14.
Dubois, E. 1892b. Palaeontologische onderzoekingen op Java. Extra bijvoegsel der Javasche Courant, Verslag
van het Mijnwezen over het åe kwartaal 1891:12­15.
Dubois, E. 1893. Palaeontologische onderzoekingen op Java. Extra bijvoegsel der Javasche Courant, Verslag
van het Mijnwezen over het 3e kwartaal 1892:10­14.
Dubois, E. 1894. Pithecanthropus erectus, einen mensch enaenlich e Hebergangsform aus Java. Landesdruckerei,
Batavia: 39 pp.
Dubois, Ε. 1896. Pith ecanth ropus erectus, einen menschenaenliche Ueberg ang sform. Compte-rendu des
séances du troisième Congrès International de Zoologie, Leyde, 16­21 Septembre, 1895. EJ. Brill, Leiden:
251 ­271, pl. 2.
Dubois, E. 1908. Das g eolog ische Alter der Kendeng ­ oder Trinil­Fauna. Tijdsch rift Koninklijk Nederlansch
Aardrijkskundig Genootschap, 2, 25:1235­1270.
Dubois, Ε. 1936. Nieuwe Pithecanthropus ontdekt? Algemeen Handelsblad, 18 April, 1936.
Elbert, J. 1907. De nieuwe onderzoeking en over Pithecanthropus­vraag stuk. Natuurkundig Tijdsch rift
voor Nederlandsch-Indië, 67 (3­4): 125­142.
Erickson, P.A. 1976. Origins of physical anthropology. Ph.D. thesis, University of Connecticut, Storrs: 348 pp.
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol, Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
283
Haeckel, E. 1868. Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte; Gemeinverständliche wissenschaftliche Vorträge über die
Entwicklungslehre im Allgemeinen und diejenige von Darwin, Goethe, und Lamarck im Besonderen.
Reimer, Berlin: 688 pp.
Holthuis, L.B. 1995. 1820-1958. Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie. Nationaal Natuurhistorisch
Museum, Leiden: 172 pp.
Hooijer, D . A . 1946a. Prehistoric and fossil rhinoceroses from the Malay Archipelago and India. Zoologische Mededelingen Museum Leiden, 26:1-138.
Hooijer, D . A . 1946b. Some remarks on recent, prehistoric, and fossil porcupines from the Malay Archipelago. Zoologische Mededelingen Museum Leiden, 26: 251-267.
Hooijer, D.A. 1947. On fossil and prehistoric remains of Tapirus from Java, Sumatra and China. Zoologische Mededelingen Museum Leiden, 27: 253-299.
Hooijer, D . A . 1948. Prehistoric teeth of Man and of the orang-utan from central Sumatra, with notes on
the fossil orang-utan from Java and Southern China. Zoologische Mededelingen Museum Leiden, 29:
175-301.
Hooijer, D . A . 1957. The correlation of fossil mammalian faunas and the Plio-Pleistocene boundary in
Java. Proceedings Koninklijke Nederlandsche Akademie van Wetenschappen, Series B, 60:1-10.
Hooijer, D . A . 1958. Fossil Bovidae from the Malay Archipelago and the Punjab. Zoologische Verhandelingen Museum Leiden, 38:112 pp.
Hooijer, D.A. 1960. Quaternary Gibbons from the Malay Archipelago. Zoologische Verhandelingen Museum
Leiden, 46: 41 pp.
Hooijer, D . A . 1962. Quaternary Langurs and Macaques from the Malay Archipelago. Zoologische Verhandelingen Museum Leiden, 55: 64 pp.
Huxley, T . H . 1863. Man's Place in Nature. In: Collected Essays, 1893-1894, volume 7. Georg Olms Verlag,
Hildesheim: 208 pp.
Isaac, G.L. & Pilbeam, D. Correlation charts compilated at the symposium, Appendix 1. In: Butzer, K.W.
& Isaac, G.L. (eds.), After Australopithecines; Stratigraphy, Ecology and Culture Change in the Middle
Pleistocene. Papers of the Burg Wartenstein Symposium, July, 1973. Mouton, The Hague: 889-899.
Jacob, T. & Curtis, G . H . 1971. Preliminary potassium-argon dating of early man in Java Contributions
University of California, Archaeological Dating Facility, 12: 50.
Junghuhn, F. 1857. Over fossiele zoogdierbeenderen te Patihajam, in de residentie Djapara, eiland
Java. Natuurkundig Tijdschrift voor Nederlansch-Indië, 14: 215-219.
King, W. 1864. The reputed fossil man of the Neanderthal. Quaterly Journal of Science, 1: 88-97.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1931. Sinanthropus, Pithecanthropus en de ouderdom van de Trinil-lagen. De
Mijningenieur (Bandoeng), 12:198-202.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1933. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der fossilen Wirbeltiere Javas I. Teil. Wetenschappelijke Mededeelingen Dienst Mijnbouw Nederlansch-Indië, 23:1-127.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1934. Zur Stratigraphie des javanischen Pleistocän. De Ingenieur in Nederlandsch- Indië, 1 (4): 185-201.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1935. Die fossilen Säugetierfaunen Javas. Proceedings Koninklijke Nederlandse
Akademie van Wetenschappen, 38: 88-98.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1936a. Een nieuwe Pithecanthropus ontdekt. Algemeen Indisch dagblad, 18
March 1936.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1936b. Pithecanthropus erectus, antwoord dr Von Koenigswald. Algemeen
Handelsblad, 7 May 1936.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1939. Das Pleistocän Javas. Quartär, 2: 28-53.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1940. Neue Pithecanthropus-Funde 1936-1938; Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der
Praehominiden. Wetenschappelijke Mededeelingen Dienst Mijnbouw Nederlandsch-Indië, 28:1-232.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1956. The Pleistocene of Java and the Plio-Pleistocene Boundary. Actes du IV
Congrès International du Quaternaire, Roma, 1953,1: 5-13.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1964. Potassium-argon dates and early man. Report 6 International Congress
on the Quaternary, Warsaw, 1961, 4: 325-327.
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1968. Das absolute Alter Pithecanthropus erectus Dubois. In: Kurth, G. (ed.),
Evolution und Hominisation (2nd ed.). G. Fischer, Stuttgart: 195-203.
284
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004)
Koenigswald, G.H.R. von. 1975. Early Man in Java: Catalog ue and Problems. In: Turtle, R.H. (ed.),
Paleoanthropology. Mouton, The Hague: 303­309.
Leakey, R.E. & Slikkerveer, L.J. 1993. Man-Ape, Ape-Man. Th e Quest for Human's Place in Nature and
Dubois' 'Missing Link'. Netherlands Foundation for Kenya Wildlife Service, Leiden: 184 pp.
Leinders, J. J. M . , Aziz, F., Sondaar P.Y. & Vos, J. de. 1985. The age of the hominid­bearing deposits of
Java: state of the art. Geologie en Mijnbouw, 64:167­73.
Lydekker, R. 1879. Notices of Siwalik mammals. Records of the Geological Survey of India, 12: 33­ 52.
Martin, K. 1884. Ueberreste vorweltlicher Proboscidier von Java und Banka. Sammlungen des geologischen
Reichs-Museums in Leiden, 1, 4 (1884­1889): 1­24, pl. 1.
Molengraaff, G.A.F. 1922. Geolog ie. In: Stok, J.P. van der (ed.), De zee'én van Nederlansch Oost-Indië.
Koninklijk Nederlandsch Aardrijkskundig Genootschap, Brill, Leiden: 272­357.
Oppenoorth, W.F.F. 1932. Ein neuer diluvialer Urmensch von Java. Natur und Museum, 62: 269­279.
Orchiston, D.W. & Siesser, W.G. 1982. Chronostratig raphy of the Plio­Pleistocene fossil hominids of
Java. Modern Quaternary Research in Southeast Asia, 7:131­149.
Owen, R. 1855. London: Of the Anthropoid Apes and their relation to Man. Proceedings of the Royal
Institution of Great Britain 1854-1858, 3: 26­41.
Radèn Saléh. 1867. Over fossiele beenderen van den Pandan. Natuurkundig Tijdsch rift voor Nederlansch
Indie, 29: 422­423, 426­429, 433­437, 448­451, 455­459.
Reader, J. 1981. Missing Links; Th e hunt for earliest Man. Collins, London: 272 pp.
Rensch, B. 1936. Die Gesch ich te des Sundabogens: eine tiergeograph isch e Untersuch ung. Verlag Gebrüder
Borntraeger, Berlin: 318 pp.
Shipman, P. 2001. The man who found th e missing link; Eugène Dubois and His Lifelong Quest to prove Darwin
Right. Simon & Schuster, New York: 514 pp.
Shipman, Ρ & Storm, P. 2002. Missing Links: Eug ène Dubois and the Origins of Paleoanthropology.
Evolutionary Anthropology, 11 (3): 108­116.
Shutler, R., Head, J.M., Donahue, D.J., Juli, A.J.T., Barbetti, M.F., Matsu'ura, S., Vos, J. de & Storm, P.
2004. A M S radiocarbon dates on bone from cave sites in southeast Java, Indonesia including
Wajak. Modern Quaternary Research South east Asia, 18:1­5.
Sondaar, P.Y. 1984. Faunal
evolution
and the mammalian
biostratig raphy of Java. Courier
Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 69: 219­235.
Sondaar, P.Y. & Vos, J. de. 1984. Faunal evolution and Early Man on Java. Résumés des Communications
de Table-Ronde; L'Homme fossile et son Environnement a Java; Marseille: 29­32.
Sondaar, P.Y., Vos, J. de & Leinders, J.J.M. 1983. Facts and fiction around the fossil mammals of Java.
Geologie en Mijnbouw, 62: 339­343.
Sondaar, P.Y., Aziz, F., Bergh, G.D. van den & Vos, J. de. 1996. Faunal Chang e and Hominid Evolution
During Quaternary of Jawa. Geological Research and DevelopmentCentre, Paleontology Series, 8:1­10.
Storm, P. 1995. The evolutionary significance of the Wajak skulls. Scripta Geológica, 110: 247 pp.
Storm, P. 2001. The evolution of humans in Australasia from an environmental perspective. In: Dam,
R.A.C. & Kaars, S. van der (eds.), Quarternary environmental change in th e Indonesian region. Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology, 171: 363­383.
Stringer, C.B. 1992. Replacement, continuity and the origin of Homo sapiens. In: Bräuer, G. & Smith,
F.H. (eds.), Continuity or Replacement, Controversies in Homo sapiens Evolution. A . A . Balkema, Rot­
terdam: 9­24.
Suzuki, M . , Budisantoso, W., Saefudin, I., & Itihara, M . 1985. Fission track ages of pumice tuff, tuff
layers, and javites of fossil homonid fossil­bearing formations in Java. Special Publication of the
Geological Research and Development Centre, 4: 309­357.
Swisher III, C.C., Curtis, G.H., Jacob, T., Getty, A.G., Suprijo, A . & Widiasmoro. 1994. Age of the earliest
known hominids in Java, Indonesia. Science, 263:1118­1121.
Swisher III, C C , Rink, W.J., Anton, S.C., Schwarcz, H.P, Curtis, G.H., Suprijo, A . & Widiasmoro. 1996.
Latest Homo erectus of Java: Potential Contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia. Science,
274:1870­1874.
Theunissen, B. 1989. Eugène Dubois and the ape-man from Java.The history of thefirst"missing link " and its
discoverer. Kluwer Academic Publications, Dordrecht: 216 pp.
Winkler Prins & Donovan. Proc. VII Int. Symp. 'Cultural Heritage in Geosciences,..'. Scripta Geol., Spec. Issue 4 (2004) 285
Theunissen, B. & Vos, J. de. 1982. Eugene Dubois, ontdekker van de rechtopgaande aapmens. Natuurhistorisch Maandblad, 71:107-111.
Theunissen, B., Vos, J. de, Sondaar, P.Y. & Aziz, F. 1990. The establishment of a chronological framework for the hominid-bearing deposits of Java; a historical survey. Geological Society of America,
Special Paper, 242: 39-54.
Vos, J. de. 1983. The Pongo-îaunas from Java and Sumatra and their significance for biostratigraphycal
and paleo-ecological interpretations. Proceedings Koninklijke Nederlansche Akademie van wetenschappen,
series B, 86: 417-425.
Vos, J. de. 1984. Reconsideration of Pleistocene cave faunas from South China and their relation to the
faunas from ]avã..Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 69: 259-266.
Vos, J. de. 1985a. Faunal stratigraphy and Correlation of the Indonesian Hominid Sites. In: Delson, E.
(ed.), Ancestors: The Hard Evidence. Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York: 215-220.
Vos, J. de. 1985b. De Collectie Dubois. Cranium, 2: 26-32.
Vos, J. de. 1995. The migration of Homo erectus and Homo sapiens in South-East Asia and the Indonesian
Archipelago. In: Bower, J.R.F. & Sarton, S. (eds.), Human evolution in its Ecological Context, Proceedings of the Pithecanthopus Centennial 1893-1993 Congress, Vol. I, Evolution and Ecology of Homo erectus:
239-260.
Vos, J. de. 1996. Faunal Turnovers in Java in relation to faunas of the continent. Odontologie, Association
for comparative Odontology, 1: 32-36.
Vos, J. de. 2002. A Century of Dutch Paleo-Anthropological Research in Indonesia. In: Vermeulen, H .
& Kommers, J. (eds.), Tales from Academia; History of Anthropology in the Netherlands, Part 2. Niccos,
Nijmegen Studies in Development and Cultural Change, 40: 1095-1116 [Verlag für Entwickelungspolitik
Saarbrüken GmbH.]
Vos, J. de & Aziz, F. 1989. The excavations by Dubois (1891-1900), Selenka (1906-1908), and the Geological Survey by the Indonesian -Japanese Team (1976-1977) at Trinil (Java, Indonesia). Journal of
the Anthropological Society of Nippon, 97: 407-420.
Vos, J. de, Aziz, F., Sondaar P.Y., & Bergh, G.D. van den. 1999. Homo erectus in S.E. Asia: Time Space and
migration routes; a global model III. Migration Routes and Evolution. In: Gibert, J., Sanchez, F. Gibert, L. & Ribot, F. (eds.), The hominids and their environment during the lower and middle Pleistocene of
Eurasia. Proceedings of the International Conference of Human Paleontology, Orce 1995: 369-383.
Vos, J. de, Sartono, S., Hardja-Sasmita S. & Sondaar, P.Y. 1982. The fauna from Trinil, type locality of
Homo erectus; a reinterpretation. Geologie en Mijnbouw, 61: 207-211.
Vos, J. de & Sondaar, P.Y. 1982. The importance of the "Dubois Collection" reconsidered. Modern Quaternary Research in South-East Asia, 7: 35-63.
Vos, J. de & Sondaar, P.Y. 1994. Dating Hominid Sites in Indonesia. Science 266:1726-1727.
Vos, J. de & V u the Long. 2001. First settlements: Relations between continental and Insular Southeast
Asia. In: Sémah, F., Falguères, Ch., Grimaud-Hervé, D. & Sémah, A . M . (eds.), Origine des peuplements et chronologie des Cultures paléolithiques dan le Sud-est Asiatique: 225-249.
V u the Long, Vos, J. de & Ciochon, R. 1996. The fossil mammal fauna of the Lang Trang Caves, Vietnam, compared with southeast Asian fossil mammal faunas: The geographical implications. IndoPacific Prehistory Association Bulletin, 14 (Chiang Mai Papers, Volume 1): 101-109.
Watanabe, N . & Kadar, D. (eds.). 1985. Quaternary Geology of the hominid fossil bearing formations
in Java. Special Publication of the Geological Research and Development Centre, 4:1-378.
Wolpoff, M . H . , Wu Xin Zhi, & Thorne, A . G . 1984. Modern Homo sapiens origins: a general theory of
hominid evolution involving the fossil evidence from East Asia. In: Smith, F.H. & Spencer, F.
(eds.), The Origins of Modern Humans: a World Survey of the Fossil Evidence. A.R. Liss, New York:
411-483.