Last night, Andrew McKenna called my attention to a report recently posted by a TIGHAR critic that provides what appears to be solid documentation that the sextant box found with the castaway bones in 1940 came from the November, 1939 USS Bushnell survey. The Naval Observatory Number on the box Gallagher found was 1542. That N.O. number is recorded as being among Bushnell sextants sent to the Naval Observatory for "general overhaul" in late 1938. The Bushnell survey of Gardner Island was in November 1939.
We’ve lost what always appeared to be a strong link between the castaway and Earhart, but this is nonetheless a positive development. Documented fact is always welcome, and this does not effect the other evidence that says the castaway was Earhart.
The owner of the blog
The Ghost of Gardner Island doesn’t give his name but apparently at one time he was on the TIGHAR Forum.
I’ve sent him this email:
I just read your “
Origin of the Nikumaroro Sextant Box.” It’s a terrific piece of research and I agree you with you that the box found near the castaway’s remains was from USS Bushnell.
As you say, when you first proposed that the box came from USS Bushnell I thought the suggestion was “thoroughly bizarre.” Whether bizarre or not, you have shown that your hypothesis is correct. I should not have been so dismissive. I’m sorry. Please accept my apology.
I could not imagine how a valuable piece of equipment could have been left behind by the Bushnell surveyors and then end up in the immediate vicinity of the partial skeleton looking like it had been "used latterly merely as a receptacle.” (August 8, 1941 note to file by High Commissioner Sir Harry Luke ;
https://tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Documents/Bones_Chronology7.html) without the surveyors also noticing the bones. That still seems “bizarre”, but it happened. Your suggestion that "a Bushnell surveyor happened to lose it in the vicinity of the remains of the castaway’s final campsite” doesn't explain its described appearance, which I take to mean that the internal structures in the box had been removed to make more useful as simply a way to carry stuff. Why would a surveyor do that?
Here’s one possible sequence of events:
• November 1939 - The box, probably containing the sextant, gets left behind when USS Bushnell departs.
• At that time there were a couple dozen Gilbertese laborers living on the island, clearing land and planting coconuts. (Not speculation) One of them finds the box. The sextant is of no use but the nice wooden box with a handle is good for carrying stuff if you tear out the internal fixtures. (Speculation)
• April 1940 - A work party goes to the southeast end of the island to cut hardwood (Kanawa) for the construction of furniture for the Government Rest House then under construction. (Not speculation) One of the laborers has the box with him.(Speculation)
• While cutting wood, the work party comes upon a human skull and buries it. (Not speculation) Someone, probably the Island Magistrate Buakee Koata, also finds and collects a Benedictine bottle. (Not Speculation)
• When the work party leaves the site, the box is left behind near where the skull is buried. (Speculation)
• September 1940 - Gallagher arrives on the island, hears about the skull, and goes to investigate. Gallagher finds the partial skeleton, part of a woman’s shoe, part of a man’s shoe, some small corks with dress chains, and the box. He naturally, but incorrectly, associates the box with the castaway. (Not speculation)
Of course, none of this offers an alternative explanation for the castaway, the shoe parts, the corks, and all of the signs of a castaway campsite.
Loose ends:
• Why would the laborer leave his box behind?
• Gallagher associates the box with the castaway. Nobody tells him “that's my box.
• Gallagher reported that “part of the lens of an inverting eyepiece” was also found but was “thrown away by finder.” Apparently Gallagher never saw it and seems to be basing his identification of the object on a description. Who is describing it? The finder? When was it found and thrown away? I can’t make it make sense.