California (Spanish) Settlement Investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

InflictionOfConviction

Banned
Nov 28, 2017
117
53
Primary Interest:
Other
Been doing some research on California, the first Spanish and European explorers of what is today's actual California on all the maps. There seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding who did what and where things took place, between extremely inacurate maps of early California, the multiple namings and mis-namings of points and areas, the translations of accounts of explorations from Spanish to Dutch, Reports from Cortes to the Crown, and so-forth, and so-forth. Missing documents and possible misinformation from the Spanish Crown, along with a myriad of other things. I think it's time to take a fresh look at what most likely happened in the first explorations of California, U.S.A. and make some sense of things.

First things First
Alta California and The Baja Peninsula
by all accounts they seem to be the same place
My Theory is that the Baja Peninsula opening, a pretty treacherous place was less valued by the Crown than the Los Angeles and San Diego areas and most importantly the Monterey Bay Area, With the main anchorage at Capitola in Santa Cruz, being the most interesting. "With Possible Gold Production" as the reason.
 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!
Last edited:
Last edited:
I suppose it is easy to see that California is not an island, but todays California is vastly different than California of the 1500's, The biggest being the draining of Tulare Lake which probably contributed to part of the confusion of the map makers or made an easier ruse.

There are four major rivers in the basin: Kings, Kaweah, Tule and Kern rivers. Historically, they fed into Tulare Lake south of Hanford, which was 41/2 times bigger than Lake Tahoe. In 1853, the lake was so full it overflowed to the north into the San Joaquin River. As well as other prehistoric large lakes, and the Salton Sea, to the untrained eye at certain times, California could quite possibly looked like an island.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulare_Lake

The first being the long Baja peninsula, and the second being the San francisco Bay.
 

Last edited:
First Question
Who was the first to figure out California wasn't an Island, and when did they know it.
Other Questions
Why did they feel it was necessary to do a detail map of California as an Island in the first place?
What were the parts of California that really drew interest from the First California explorers?
 

Last edited:
To Me, Santa Cruz and especially nearby Pescadero Beach are the most interesting archeological sites. With signs of Quartz and Petrified wood scattered around. Obviously a big flow of water use to pass down that area long ago, along with a lot of Koho salmon. It would of been a major site along with vast amount of sea life swimming around the Monterey bay.

http://i.imgur.com/wOWUWvK.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/0FtbmPZ.jpg
 

are you in california?
 

Early California First Explorers "History"

Some answered questions believe it or not

Early California: pre-1769?1840s: Early Explorers | Picture This

Such long periods of non-exploration? Interesting

Some of the cast, along with the Crown

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernán_Cortés


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Magellan


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Rodríguez_Cabrillo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_de_Ulloa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolomé_Ferrer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastián_Vizcaíno

The most interesting


Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo

Bartolomé Ferrer

Sebastián Vizcaíno
 

Last edited:
That statement doesn't make any sense, "Pacific Coast of Baha California" is on the pacific ocean. What gulf? The explorer to figure out that California wasn't an Island was the explorer that left his ship stuck in the mud in Colonias Nuevas and had to abandon ship, and that's a hard lesson to learn.



https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a6/36/af/a636af145be09c57a5667cc7cad73efb--funny-but-true-funny-ha-ha.jpg

i think he by-passed most of the Baja Peninsula, probably because of it's treachery, and took the ship to a hard flowing river most likely making port in Ensenada, maybe San Diego, and quite possibly as far up the coast as Santa Cruz. the River might even of been the Pescadero. And besides in those days the captain would of chose to port his ship on the far side of any island away from mainland for safety reasons "possible Hostiles".
 

Last edited:
If Francisco de Ulloa was in fact that dumb to sail all the way up between the Baja Peninsula and what is now Mexico, That could quite possibly be his ship in Colonias Nuevos, and accounts of the journey were changed to keep him in good graces with the crown.

Probably most likely scenario
Voyage accounts don't make sense, probally his ship

Interesting

the Plot thickens as well as the mud



Obviously O'l Francisco wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed.
And If that is his ship he was obviously trying to make it farther up the coast, for some reason.
 

Last edited:
So that means that most likely another explorer or explorers before Francisco de Ulloa most likely would of sailed up the Pacific coast side of the Baja Peninsula prior to 1539, if in fact he was trying to get farther up the coast maybe believing a channel existed. Any explorer sailing up from Mexico worth his salt, venturing past the tip of the Baja Peninsula after 1539 would of taken a left and hugged the Pacific Coast side of the Baja peninsula for sure.

So It Looks like 1539 is a significant year for spanish explorers heading up the coast to what is modern day California.

A fiasco like that would of made a big impression on any perspective explorer that wanted to go farther up the coast.

the plot thickens further
 

Last edited:
Actually for anyone to continue on with that much drive they must of already had some type of map, showing California as an Island. And if he had a map it must of been based off of an Aztec account, because I don't think Cabrillo could of made it to the San Francisco Bay prior to 1539. Which makes sense when looking at the early maps of California as an Island.

or maybe not

There must of been at least 2 ships on that voyage, one left stuck in the mud, they must of doubled up and doubled back around the Baja Peninsula up the Pacific coast side, Cabrillo being the most likely.
Interesting, I wonder how much of that ship is still there.

http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/504136216bb3f79155000008-1200/california-as-an-island.jpg

https://www.desertusa.com/desert-activity/lost-ship-desert.html

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4209

Could a 16th century Spanish ship been mistaken for an 18th century Chinese pearl ship?

http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/e160ecc56...-of-flagship-of-the-spanish-armada-eremgb.jpg

http://www.thepiratesrealm.com/chinese junk.html

Spain must of started it's navy by purchasing used Chinese "Junks" and modifying and refitting them for long distance travel. That would explain the unusual designs of The 17th century spanish galleons. Heavy chinese influence.

Cabrillo must of been Portuguese. With Portugal playing an intricate part of the discovery of the Americas. Portugal must of been heavily involved in all early explorations and expeditions.
 

Last edited:
northward along the Gulf AND Pacific coasts of Baja California. The Gulf of California is the gulf he is talking about.

InflictionOfConviction said:
That statement doesn't make any sense, "Pacific Coast of Baha California" is on the pacific ocean. What gulf? The explorer to figure out that California wasn't an Island was the explorer that left his ship stuck in the mud in Colonias Nuevas and had to abandon ship, and that's a hard lesson to learn.



https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a6/36/af/a636af145be09c57a5667cc7cad73efb--funny-but-true-funny-ha-ha.jpg

i think he by-passed most of the Baha Penninsula, probably because of it's treachery, and took the ship to a hard flowing river most likely making port in Ensenada, maybe San Diego, and quite possibly as far up the coast as Santa Cruz. the River might even of been the Pescadero. And besides in those days the captain would of chose to port his ship on the far side of any island away from mainland for safety reasons "possible Hostiles".
Click to expand...
 

infliction-of-conviction, I am a CA hunter, have found scores of reales here. Dating back to the 1740s/50s. I docent tours at Carmel mission and presidio of Monterey.

For the life of me I can't make heads or tails of your thread. Why the fascination that early map-makers thought CA was an island ? A simple look at a world map shows you that the Baja peninsula extends down. Right ? So the first numb-nuts cartographer thought the ocean continued up the east side of that land mass. It certainly *looked* like an island if you're viewing it from the south end. What's so mysterious and conspiracy -lending ?? And then scores of map-makers there-after simply copy the same earlier mistake, from off of earlier maps. I fail to understand your fascination with this :( The mistake was on some maps even up to the founding of San Diego in 1769-ish.

No .... Capitola and Santa Cruz were not the favored spots for potential port, nor original exploratin points of Monterey Bay. Monterey and Carmel River outlet were the original explorations and port here.

And no, ... "gold" was not the reason for their exploration here (no more so than having kept their eyes open ANY where they went in the world). There's no natural gold in this area of CA (that's worthy of any sort of commercial production or economic value). And ... in fact .... that's one of the reasons the Spanish crown , at one point early on ... wanted to abandon the continuation of the colonization/mission effort. Was because alta CA was deemed to have no economic wealth .

Other than this, you're asking scores of rambling questions and musings. If you'd care to boil down to a single focus point or question(s), I'll take a stab at more.
 

Last edited:
The Portuguese or someone of Portuguese decent must of been the first to realize the possibility of long term sea travel with a modified, refitted chinese ship.

Now, because of ocean currents I am starting to believe the Chinese and or or Japanese also must of been involved heavily in Long Range exploration. They must of at least made it to British Columbia or even farther down the Pacific Coast. The Japanese were known for their fishing abilities and lived on an island.



That's where those maps came from


https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15040888

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...arth-ancient-shipyard-of-Chinas-Columbus.html

It's an onion

Interesting
The Nina, Pinta, Santa Maria, MADE IN CHINA, there is 3 pieces of junk that made it to America
interesting
Not only that, but they would of also of had intimate knowledge of the far east, with possible long range expeditions used in staging the expeditions to the western coast of the Americas.

The Philippines must of been that staging ground for all those expeditions.

This Magellan route map doesn't seem right
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Magellan#/media/File:Magellan_Elcano_Circumnavigation-en.svg

https://www.oceanblueproject.org/up.../world-circulation-map-of-currents_1_orig.jpg

Magellan might of been the first European to sail the California Coast in 1521. If accounts are wrong logic dictates that Magellan hugged the coast down from Alaska, and possibly confusing or mixing some of the Islands off British Columbia in with California, Maybe even entering San Francisco harbor and thinking it was another Island. Hence the Island map.

But If he did follow that route, he would of took note of Monterey Bay, and could be the reason Francisco de Ullia was trying to go up the Gulf of California, thinking it an Island and wanting to survey and make camp on the other side, away from possible hostiles or indigenous peoples encountered by Magellan.
 

Last edited:
Probably the biggest historic shipwreck left to possibly find would be the ship from The Francisco de Ulloa Expedition that got stuck in the mud at the basin of the Colorado River in the gulf of California. Most likely few timbers remain if any, and at least a 50-100 foot spread of the Ballast stones accounting for current and time in the basin.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/e8/07/ac/...8559f2e4b--santa-maria-christoph-kolumbus.jpg

https://kashgar.com.au/blogs/history/the-wreck-of-the-royal-nanhai

If there were 2 ships on that expedition, and 1 got out, Maybe one was a larger vessel and one smaller.
they probably resembled the Nina, Pinta, Or Santamaria

No use for "treasure hunters" to go looking for the wreck, since it most likely contained no gold or pearls or anything "precious", and if it did they would of been stripped by now,
The real value lies in the exact location timbers and ballast stones, once disturbed, worthless. So a detailed archeological team would have to do the excavation to record and to prove provenance.

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.7516451,-114.7759933,11z

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_de_Ulloa


Even the Timbers of the ship and Ballast Stones would be historic, and interesting to see, carbon date and analyze, if it was chinese made, pretty sure some of those ballast stones would come from some region of the far east.

I still think Pescadero Beach was a Point of interest to early Spanish Explorers, though. unreported large scale mining and refinement went on in that vicinity prior to anything on record.
Might be interesting to do a new rendering and modeling of the area to show "what the area most likely looked like in the 1600's."








http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=544253&d=1332453191

http://www.history-map.com/picture/001/pictures/California-Gold-Map.jpg

pretty detailed map for 1851

Good luck with your history books, though
 

Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

NEED SOME HELP & TIPS ON METAL DETECTING HIGH TRASH AREAS?

⬅️ Previous Thread

Possible "Hole In The Wall Gang Photo" San Francisco Bay

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Steve's Detector Rods

Latest Discussions

Back
Top