JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[Oroblanco]

Gullyoto: the map to the main deposit at Tayopa lists, among other things, 180 bodies

180 dead of what? Typhus? Smallpox? Apaches? Seris? Spanish? Or do you hold that they were killed by Jesuits? Could they simply be the village cemetery? Were they found in a mass grave? Sealed in a mine? Did the remains show signs of violence? Even if that is the case, they could be casualties of hostile Indian attacks, just as at least one legend of Tayopa tells it; that the Apaches came and massacred the inhabitants in a surprise attack. Why would you think that the padres killed them? Wouldn't that tend to make the "flock" view the padres in a very negative way? One might speculate that the Indians would preserve a legend of such a mass murder by their own padres if such ever happened, wouldn't you think?

Which brings me to that point, in support of what mi amigo Gollum stated, while there is some evidence that the padres did kill Indians of their own flocks, as in the case of the woman put into the stocks and left there until she died, or the prisoner lanced, these are individual cases and not a wholesale slaughter. It is not logical to kill many of your Indians after all, since they are your labor force in the eyes of the padres. Remember the padres stood in a legal sense, and in their own eyes, as the "guardians" and "fathers" in the sense of a ruling figure. So while I have no doubt of Jesuit involvement in some ugly, nasty and even murderous episodes of history, in most all cases the victims were not their own flocks. Pagans, protestants, heretics, even apostates might be fair game but not the faithful. The stories of killing the men who helped hide the treasures usually belong with the pirate stories, Aztecs or Incas, IMHO, where there is some evidence that such things might well have happened.

Please do continue;
Oroblanco

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Nah Oro, they are inside of a closed (still, sniff ) deposit.. Most are constantly not differentiating between the mission priest and Rome's Jesuits / coadjutors. The mission priest starved and ate grasshoppers with his flock, but they were harsh disciplinarians Rome's people were merciless if it was in the cause - like protecting a few million Reales..

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Twas most o the Sierra tribes Ed, the Apache were only a small part actually..

 

[deducer]

One last point here but father Och's account of the Spanish authorities search, while most entertaining for his sarcasm, is not an accurate description of the search activities at any of the frontier missions. In fact NO search was done at all, in many cases there was not even an inventory done until the Franciscan padres arrived to replace the Jesuits nearly a year later, and it was reported at the time that many things had been looted or simply vanished. So we might imagine Spanish troops holding their noses while rooting around in the cesspool of the mission at Tubac, yet nothing like that occurred there and even the roundup was simply a call sent to the padres to come in. There was significant opportunity for orders to have been given by the padres to conceal and safekeep the treasures and ornaments at many of the missions in the frontier areas.

Roy, considering the tenacity of the searches that took place in Mexico City, is it not reasonable that the Spanish might have sent out search parties to the missions in the Pimeria Alta, or at least the better-known ones? We do know they were also sent to Puebla from this excerpt in Fr. Och's diary:

Another, and choicer morsel: In Puebla, twenty-four hours from Mexico in the College of the Holy Ghost, treasure-hunting caused an even greater turmoil.

 

[Oroblanco]

Deducer wrote

Roy, considering the tenacity of the searches that took place in Mexico City, is it not reasonable that the Spanish might have sent out search parties to the missions in the Pimeria Alta, or at least the better-known ones? We do know they were also sent to Puebla from this excerpt in Fr. Och's diary:

Another, and choicer morsel: In Puebla, twenty-four hours from Mexico in the College of the Holy Ghost, treasure-hunting caused an even greater turmoil

　
I will grant that it is reasonable to speculate that the Spanish sent out search parties to the missions and colleges, yet there is no record of any such searches at any of the missions in northern Mexico or Baja, so far as I could learn. Not even at Arizpe. It is possible that after the negative results at Mexico city and Puebla and perhaps other major facilities, where apparently the Spanish had presumed the wealth to be accumulating, PERHAPS it was thought to be a waste of time to search at the lesser places like missions or visitas. Speaking of San Xavier del Bac, Tumacacori, Guevavi, Calabazas, Arivaca, the visita at Tubac garrison (where Spanish troops were located, should have been easy) Magdalena, Caborica etc there was hardly even an examination of what was visible at the time of the "roundup"; the Franciscans did an inventory on their arrival and as father Garces noted, many things which were known to have been in the mission churches had vanished, and I know of at least one letter of complaint about the valuables disappearing from the missions during the period when the Jesuit padres had been marched off, and the Franciscans arrived to replace them. The valuables which were disappearing included herds of cattle, sheep, horses, stores of grain in the warehouses etc not just silver statues or gold monstrances.

　
Even so, the Franciscans were able to find enough gold and silver church "ornaments" along with bells, robes etc in the Baja Jesuit missions to help outfit their expansion into California Alta, though not as much as was desired of course.

I will grant that it is possible that extensive searches were done at all of the frontier missions and visitas, and I had imagined that must have happened yet there is no record of any search at any of these frontier missions in northern Mexico, and a quite belated one at the Baja missions. Even there, the only search mentioned is at ONE mission that is not named, may have been the main one at Loreto? If there had been searches done at the frontier missions, I would think that someone would have mentioned it, like father Garces when writing of how little remained at "his" new missions as he found them.

I welcome any evidence from anyone that the Spanish authorities searched at the Arizona, Sonora missions during the Jesuit expulsion. I found none.

　
Don Jose de la Mancha wrote

Nah Oro, they are inside of a closed (still, sniff ) deposit.. Most are constantly not differentiating between the mission priest and Rome's Jesuits / coadjutors. The mission priest starved and ate grasshoppers with his flock, but they were harsh disciplinarians Rome's people were merciless if it was in the cause - like protecting a few million Reales..

Do not forget that the coadjutors were very much under the orders of the priests. The priests at the missions were very like little despots, "bosses" as the Indios seem to have viewed them, the coadjutors could not operate without the authority of the priests, and this extended to punishments. Punishments (which I presume executions would fall under) were usually done by trusted Indios, so that the priests did not soil their hands. It is noted in a number of sources that nothing took place without the nod of the priests. I would first suspect a mass grave of Indians whom died of violence to be the casualties of the Apache attack found in legend and referred to in some historic sources such as the "Indians of North America" which records Teopira having been "depopulated" by Apache surprise attack. I do not disagree that a coadjutor was likely the man in charge at some operations, yet as we see in the letters of father Segesser, a padre whom spent time in Arizona, he complained of being forced to "oversee everything" and the expense of hiring an overseer, and the reference to his not being able to work the mines in comfort. No mention of any coadjutor being responsible for these activities - and it looks like not every mission had coadjutors, or not all of the time.

Hmm can't seem to say this in a few words but anyway I believe that the Jesuit priests had made their Indios the protectors of the mission treasures. In support of this contention, the otherwise strange events at San Xavier del Bac, on the return of Jesuits in early 1860s, it was the Indians themselves that brought the valuable ornaments out to show to their padres, and on the padres departing due to the Civil War, it was again the Indians that took care of hiding those ornaments again. Plus most of the "legends" of lost mines, the Indians knew of the locations and passed along some information to early Anglo treasure hunters. You would not massacre the people you were trusting to guard the treasures, it is just not logical, and we have an alternate explanation that is perfectly plausible in the end of Tayopa. Remember Tayopa was abandoned long before the Jesuits were suppressed. That 1646 inventory found by Flipper was likely due to bishop Palafox attempting to rein in the Jesuits, not a report of the findings of Spanish authorities.

Please do continue, sorry for the long-winded post.

Oroblanco

 

[deducer]

Never be sorry for a long-winded post, Roy. They are all interesting and I always learn something new from you.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Correct ED, east side of the Caballo mts. Cool lime ade??

 

[UncleMatt]

I prefer Proverbs 28:1 myself:

"The wicked flee when no man pursues, but the righteous are bold as a young lion"

 

[sailaway]

DEC. 3 1930 EYE WITNESS OF BELLS Crooks account chasing Geronimo in Sonora, Mexico

The Apache Diaries: A Father-Son Journey
By Grenville Goodwin, Neil Goodwin 2000

 

[sailaway]

According to the Mexican Mining Journal Tayopa was being mined in 1915

Mexican Mining Journal, Volumes 19-20 1915

http://books.google.com/books?id=Ce...EoQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Geronimo tayopa&f=false

 

[sailaway]

Is this the attack at Tayopa?

Indeh: An Apache Odyssey 1980
By Eve Ball, Nora Henn, Lynda A. Snchez

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Not The Tayopa, that was tayopa # 2 orig acrage now owned by many co's Trinidad.

W of Yecora.

 

[cactusjumper]

sailaway,

I have serious doubts that Goodwin believed in the mine, or the involvement of the Padres. There are a number of names, in Mexico, that are similar to Tayopa. Believe that causes a great deal of confusion.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Your'e sure that you aren't OIRISH Tayopa Joe ? Yes there was this confusion on names in early days, which is why mines were early on identified with Expedient numbers, not names.For example the present Tayopa (it's mine) is identified as # 200480. Of Course each tie that particular piece of ground is re-filed upon it nay only be for a part of the original so the original maa be split up into "X" no of sub files ah it is much easier to simply use your Ouija board after a few years.Expediente no are never cancelled. Ownerships, yes.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI OIRISH oro, yes I agree the local adjustors were under the thumbs of the mission Priests, but there were others that were sent out from Rome that only had their allegiance to Rome. The usual Jesuit technique was not to let one hand hnow what ons hand was doing to the other.

 

[Oroblanco]

HI OIRISH oro, yes I agree the local adjustors were under the thumbs of the mission Priests, but there were others that were sent out from Rome that only had their allegiance to Rome. The usual Jesuit technique was not to let one hand hnow what ons hand was doing to the other.

Do you know of any documented visit(s) by these other coadjutors, whom were operating under authority from Rome rather than under the padres? Besides the Argentina example, which might have been under the oversight of a priest, impossible to say at this time. Thank you in advance;
Oroblanco

 

[sailaway]

Oroblanco wrote:
the visita at Tubac garrison (where Spanish troops were located, should have been easy)

Is it not a fact that the Garrison at Tubac had been abandoned a year prior to fight the Series in the west?

Juan Bautista de Anza II, second commander of the presidio, led two overland expeditions to the Pacific, resulting in the founding of San Francisco, in 1776. Several hundred colonists from the provinces of Sinaloa and Sonora, along with sixty from Tubac, made the trip. Over 1,000 head of cattle, horses and mules were also gathered to transport food supplies and tools, provide food on the journey and establish new herds once the colonists settled at their new home on the Pacific.
Following Anza's return to Tubac, military authorities moved the garrison from Tubac to Tucson in 1776, and the unprotected settlers abandoned their homes.
Arizona State Parks: Tubac Presidio: Home

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

nah I do not have access to the Jesuit files, that is why I am fishing here. Someone just might have a reference that will serve as the golden key. Sides, have you ever heard of a simple chain of command? there are allways sub chains that are listed as "Need to know".

 

[Oroblanco]

Sailaway wrote

Is it not a fact that the Garrison at Tubac had been abandoned a year prior to fight the Series in the west?

　
Yes and no - the expedition was sent off the previous year, but did not involve the whole garrison only a portion:

Seri Campaign of 1766. In December of 1766 Lt. Juan M. Oliva had a detachment of a corporal and nine enlisted men from the Tubac company on duty on the Seri frontier keeping watch and ward over those hostiles (Rubí Dec. 21, 1766). The Seris were at that time holed up in the Cerro Prieto, tying down the Tubac detachments and others (Rubí Dec. 31, 1766a).

There was no other campaign in 1767 involving the Tubac presidio, the year of the Jesuit expulsion, and even if Lt. Oliva's detachment was still absent, the returns for the garrison show:

1766 was fifty-one officers and men (Rubí Dec. 21, 1766)

- so should have had around forty officers and men at hand. The fort was never left utterly un-manned while it was an active fort. Source,

Tubac Through Four Centuries: An Historical Resume and Analysis

　
Real de Tayopa wrote

nah I do not have access to the Jesuit files, that is why I am fishing here. Someone just might have a reference that will serve as the golden key. Sides, have you ever heard of a simple chain of command? there are allways sub chains that are listed as "Need to know".

While I do not doubt that some visits may have occurred in the frontier by these "extraordinary" type Jesuits, I have not seen any mention of them, so far. Considering that the periodic visits by the Superior or Provincial are recorded to a degree (don't think that every such tour is in our 'library' of available information today) I would expect that a padre would likely have recorded such a visit which would have been an unusual event. It is also POSSIBLE that such a person might have traveled incognito, completely - so that not even the padres would know, in order to observe and report to the General what was going on at the missions.

Please do continue,
Oroblanco

　

　
　
　
　
　

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

He wouldn't know an qt adjustor if he saw one