Holmes "Missing" directions

[Blindbowman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

ya , you wait right there he will be right back .. 2 or 3 months from now ...lol

i think joe just put you on hold ...lol

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

If you would rather I ask your question of Dr. Glover, give me a short list of specific questions and I will tell you what he replies with. Actually I'm not sure his website has a way to send him a message, so I may be your best bet.

Joe

 

[Blindbowman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

LOL now its a bet

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

I would appreciate that.

The only question i had was about the part where Glover says the Holmes directions say to "Go to First Water". Glover seems to say in his book that "we" know this isnt true.

Whats true? What did Waltz really say first? That may be in "Part 1", which i do not own so, forgive me if i'm asking something that should be commom knowledge.

thanks again,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

I asked Thomas about your question last night. He replied this morning, and the answer was pretty much what I thought it would be. Tom Kollenborn has written an article about the names of many landmarks and places in the Superstitions and how they came to be.

http://www.superstitionmountain.info/chronicles/2008/10_13_08.html

In Waltz's time, most of the canyons, mountains, etc., were unnamed.

This is the pertinent part of Thomas' email:
__________________________________

"If I understand the question, the answer is that it would have been near impossible for Waltz to say "Go to First Water". Today's First Water wasn't named then. So First Water was not a proper name. Whatever Waltz said it had to be something like, Go to the first water, or take such and such trail to its first water, or something like that. By the time Brownie wrote the Holmes Manuscript the name or term first water had come to mean First Water. And that's how it has come into the clues."
_________________________________

Personally, I feel that too many people put too much faith in the Waltz "quotes" from Brownie Holmes Manuscript. I believe that someone from Brownie's time wrote much/most of the "deathbed" last words of Waltz, with no input from anyone who was there.

Since Brownie denied ever seeing/writing the manuscript, to his last days, my guess is that he and his familie's histories are the only portions of the manuscript that were penned by Brownie.

I'm guessing Tom Kollenborn may know who named First Water and when. At a guess, it wouldn't surprise me to find out it was Gus. It is also likely that Greg Davis might also be able to answer your question.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Thank you for the information. I had actually come across that same article by Tom K before when i was looking for something else. That Tom probably knows more about those Mountains than the animals that live there!

Glover statement makes perfect sense. I wasnt sure if First Water was actually called that "back in the day" or, if they just referred to it as "the" First Water in Waltz' time. Obviously its clear now that it wasnt.

I have always suspected that it was either Hackberry Springs or Hidden Water that Waltz was referring to. My personal belief is that it was Hidden Water. If the "directions" part of the Manuscript are really from Waltz though, he could have very well have said, "Go to THE first water", which could have very well have been Hackberry Springs. It is also my opinion though, that it doesnt matter which one it is in the Holmes directions, as there is another source that will get you to the correct Spring.

I havent had the opportunity to meet Greg yet. Jerry told me that Greg has a pretty extensive "open library" so I hope to meet him someday for the opportunity to check it out.

Thanks again for checking with Glover,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

No problem. I like to help folks out where I can.

Good luck,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

All,

Here's an interesting post from Wayne Tuttle back in 2008:

zentull
01-31-2008, 08:46 AM
Here is a 1903 account of the Lost Dutchman mine and a good accounting that the Holmes story in one form or another was well known by that time. According to this version Holmes was too afraid to search for the mine because of the Apaches and others searching for the mine. In this account the Apaches cover the mine and tunnel as well. A nice mixture of the two soldiers and massacre thrown in for good measure.

So far this is the earliest account I have that was published of the Holmes story and while it is different, it is interesting. I will just throw out a synopsis of the story for the time being.

Jake Miller and his nephew Jerry Miller were confederate soldiers and after the war they headed down to Mexico to avoid the union soldiers. They came upon the Peralta family in Sonora who were preparing for a trip to mines in the Arizona territory. The two went along with the party and Jake bought the rights to the mine after the trip with their share worth 60,000 dollars.

Jerry wanted to go to Santa Fe and record the claim after they got back, but Jake was against it and the two argued. Jerry took off and Jake trailed him to the spring by hidden water and shot him. Johnny Jones brother in law Gomez found the skull years later with a hole shot through the forehead.

Jake worked the mine for a bit and then headed into to Phoenix and hired a black woman to take care of him. He sold the gold to the Valley bank for 18,800 and took in a young Mexican named Rodriguez. Rodriguez was a bad man, drunk and gambling all the time.

One trip Jake found two soldiers working the mine from fort Huachuca who were on their way to fort McDowell. Jake killed both of them and buried them near the mine.

Just before Jake died a man named Dick Holmes slipped in and passed himself off as Rodriguez and got Jake to tell him where the mine was. He couldn’t get the map cause Rodriguez had hidden it. After Jake died Holmes got Rodriguez drunk and stole the map from him, but he was afraid to go after the mine cause Rodriguez would kill him.

Rodriguez went to Sonora to talk to the Peraltas but they were dead, but 2 packers knew where the mine was and they went there with him straight away. The mine was a round hole thirty or forty feet across and a tunnel over at one side. An Apache was watching them and ran and got more Apaches and they slaughtered the whole group.

The entire story encompasses 12 pages and relates a weird variation of the Doc Thorne story as well.
____________________________

Sounds like someone stole this story for their own.

Any thoughts?

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Very interesting. I would love to read that whole 12 page account. Is it still up somewhere to look at it?

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

I don't believe Wayne posted the other pages. What you see, is what he posted. I have asked him if he can tell me the source and, if possible, send
me a copy of the story.

Wayne is a friend and a straight shooter. I am confident the source was from
1903. I believe it's a game changer, as far as the Holmes Manuscript is concerned. Still.........not believeable, truth wise.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Gotcha. If it happens to be "up" somewhere, post the link if you can.

Thanks,
Travis

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

I'm curious because if that whole account doesnt include the "directions", that could give some life to my theory (as well as other people I'm sure) that Waltz didnt tell Holmes anything but the "directions" and Holmes made it all up, maybe by using that or a similar story. (Going along with my "sharing" theory)

On the other hand, if it does contain the "directions", i can see where a lot of the "problems" lie with "trusting" the sources and it could mean that the WHOLE thing is made up. Holmes was "scared" to go out there because of the Apache....I love it! The Manuscript makes him sound like a "Bada$$" when he could have been a "Chicken"!

Thanks,
Travis

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Hello,

Could this account also be someone from the "other camp" trying to discredit Holmes(roughly 12 years had gone by)? It makes me wonder if the Holmes story (from the Manuscript) was at least circulating back then(by word of mouth?) and, someone "took" that information and changed it to make Dick Holmes look "bad" for stealing the Gold.

I probably should wait until i see if i can get the whole 12 pages but, it sure is making me ponder.....dang it Joe....

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

[Holmes was "scared" to go out there because of the Apache....I love it! The Manuscript makes him sound like a "Bada$$" when he could have been a "Chicken"!]

I'm not sure I find those characteristics for Dick in the manuscript, but that kind of thing is why we go into such detail on the players in the LDM legend.
That would include the Apache, who were pretty scary for just about everyone in those days.

What that does, is help you to separate the wheat from the chaff. It may sound like I have gathered a lot of useless information, especially for someone who is only researching the LDM as a hobby. For me, it's all about making connections, sometimes seemingly unrelated, but often amazingly on point.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

[Holmes was "scared" to go out there because of the Apache....I love it! The Manuscript makes him sound like a "Bada$$" when he could have been a "Chicken"!]

I'm not sure I find those characteristics for Dick in the manuscript, but that kind of thing is why we go into such detail on the players in the LDM legend.
That would include the Apache, who were pretty scary for just about everyone in those days.

What that does, is help you to separate the wheat from the chaff. It may sound like I have gathered a lot of useless information, especially for someone who is only researching the LDM as a hobby. For me, it's all about making connections, sometimes seemingly unrelated, but often amazingly on point.

Joe

Maybe i used the incorrect word in "bada$$" but, with descriptions like "expert tracker" (sounds like someone who might have followed an Indian or two) and when the author said Dick wanted to "go get the mine right now, im not afraid of that old man". Coupled with the story about him supposedly following Waltz (while the Apache were still "rampant") gives me the impression they were trying to make Dick sound pretty "fearless". If this other story is correct, maybe he wasnt that "fearless" after all? Thats all i was trying to say.

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

Wayne emailed me tonight and, to be honest, it's pretty embarrassing. He explained that the passage came from "Arizona Cowboys" by Dane Coolidge.
I have the book, and something triggered me last week to look at it and reread Chapter 8, "The Lost Dutchman Mine".

This may give a lot of people second thoughts when reading my posts, but maybe that's a good thing. Here was my reply:

[Wayne,

It's hell to get old, and you will understand why I just wrote that. I have that book, and have quoted out of it in the past. What kills me, is that I just pulled it off the shelf last week and reread the chapter on the LDM. Brother, it's almost scary where my mind has gone. Still have enough left to realize it, but that's what makes it bad.]

Just for the record, my copy is a first edition, and it was from 1938, not 1903.
To be fair, Coolidge rode the range in Arizona in 1903-04, during the great drought in Arizona. Much of this last statement is a direct quote from the book.
It seems a good bet that he picked up the story from that period.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,



No problem! You had me wondering about my theories for a minute there!

Honest mistake, nothing more. Its all good.

Thanks,
Travis

It makes you wonder if he was there in 03-04 where he heard a story that sounds so much like the Manuscript. I dont have the book so, does he mention any contact with anyone in his book? (Like Holmes, Petrasch, or Thomas)

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Something good still comes out of that!! To me, we have an idea of WHEN the Holmes "story" (or the Manuscripts "rough draft") may have been written! That means it was AT LEAST before 1938. Thats if it came from Holmes at all. Someone very well could have stolen THAT story later and used it to write the Manuscript. Either way, that "mess up" of yours very well could answer the question of WHEN that story might have been written.

It should narrow it down to two possibilities:

If he heard it in 03-04, it could very well have been "made up" by Dick Holmes and could clear up a lot of questions.

If Coolidge made up that story, someone could have stolen that and it would mean it might not have even come from Holmes at all.

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

Coolidge also had a bit of a career writing fiction, so he may have added a little color to this particular book.

He credits this story to a "stranger"......no name. That seems to put his hearing it first in the 1903-04 period. Problem is, even if you date it from 1938, it's over a decade before Brownie was working on it in front of his family.

Bottom line, is the book and story was out there before Brownie penned his first words....well before.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

Coolidge also had a bit of a career writing fiction, so he may have added a little color to this particular book.

He credits this story to a "stranger"......no name. That seems to put his hearing it first in the 1903-04 period. Problem is, even if you date it from 1938, it's over a decade before Brownie was working on it in front of his family.

Bottom line, is the book and story was out there before Brownie penned his first words....well before.

Joe

Joe,

I still believe youre onto something with this. If Coolidge did hear it around 1903-04, it COULD mean that Dick himself made all of this up by piecing together stories and that story was out already by word of mouth. Even if Coolidges version had some "slight" differences, couple that with the fact that he didnt release his book until 1938, he still had retained enough of the information to put a "close enough" story together that sounds an aweful lot like the Manuscript. (That means to me that Coolidge heard a REAL story. Not necessarily true, but someone took the time to "put it together" BEFORE Coolidge heard it.

That could also account for why Brownie didnt ever want it released. He would almost be plagiarizing someones work that was already out, even though it was his Fathers story, it sounded too much like Coolidge so, Brownie didnt want to be associated with it. You just said yourself that Coolidge was a "fiction writer". Brownie would lose all credibility if it was thought that he one, stole the material or two, was associated with a fiction writer.

Dang Joe, i dont think youre giving yourself enough credit. To me, your little "mishap" may have just "solved" the timeline!! It may not tell us the "who", but it darn sure narrowed that timeline from the 1970's to at the least 1938. And more than likely sometime BEFORE 1903 because it was obviously being "passed around" for Coolidge to have heard it. (Thats all based on IF Coolidge heard it while here. I realize he could have made it up himself)

There very well could a completely different answer to this but, i think thats the best i've heard so far about at least WHEN it could have been heard/written.(The Manuscript)

Thanks again!!!!!
Travis