JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[Springfield]

Dear group;
As an observation, when this discussion has run it's course, no one will be richer in regards to discovering Jesuit treasure troves, but we will most assuredly become better Roman Catholics in the process! So, it's not ALL bad, everyone...
Your friend;
LAMAR

You're a funny guy Lamar.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oroblanco]

Lamar wrote

to live a life of humble and modest means from the moment I took the simple vows.

Sheesh - I have been living the Jesuit life all these years without even realizing it! Of course I don't have all the wealth and power of the Order and Church behind me, which does make some differences I suppose.

Lamar also wrote

when this discussion has run it's course, no one will be richer in regards to discovering Jesuit treasure troves, but we will most assuredly become better Roman Catholics in the process! So, it's not ALL bad, everyone

Your first part is an assumption of yours, which is probably correct but cannot be stated with any absolute certainty. The next part of your statement about we becoming better Roman Catholics is most curious, considering that some of us are not Catholics at all. The last part of your rather brief paragraph is most curious of all, in that you see that our discussion is "bad" yet not ALL bad. How could an examination of history, comparing it with legends, be bad? Rule #21? Your approach to our subject matter is very curious to me. Just an observation on my part.

Oh and one more thing, Lamar wrote

And most certainly, lies, rumors, accusations, mths and untruths often times get repeated, my friend.

I would point out to you, that you have previously stated you are not calling the posted sources LIARS, yet here later, you included the very descriptive term "LIES" and that they get repeated, which certainly is an implication of calling those sources LIARS by default. It doesn't matter to me what you would call them, probably you have a very dark opinion of them indeed considering they disagree with your version of Jesuit mining, treasures etc. Rule #21 of course.

Lamar your recent explanation of Jesuit vows sure served to cloud the waters, so to speak, yet does not settle the matter whether a Jesuit would be breaking his vows if he were to be mining when various precepts forbade it. This particular point is not terribly important for a treasure hunter, but would change the record for those involved, from being disobedient to being obedient. I don't expect you will address this matter, for you still maintain that no Jesuits ever had any mines nor treasures in their possession, nor ever hid any of them. As you have refused to answer my previous question to you, about whom you credit as being first European discoverers of silver in Arizona, I won't ask you anything now.

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Lamar wrote

to live a life of humble and modest means from the moment I took the simple vows.

Sheesh - I have been living the Jesuit life all these years without even realizing it! Of course I don't have all the wealth and power of the Order and Church behind me, which does make some differences I suppose.

Lamar also wrote

when this discussion has run it's course, no one will be richer in regards to discovering Jesuit treasure troves, but we will most assuredly become better Roman Catholics in the process! So, it's not ALL bad, everyone

Your first part is an assumption of yours, which is probably correct but cannot be stated with any absolute certainty. The next part of your statement about we becoming better Roman Catholics is most curious, considering that some of us are not Catholics at all. The last part of your rather brief paragraph is most curious of all, in that you see that our discussion is "bad" yet not ALL bad. How could an examination of history, comparing it with legends, be bad? Rule #21? Your approach to our subject matter is very curious to me. Just an observation on my part.

Oh and one more thing, Lamar wrote

And most certainly, lies, rumors, accusations, mths and untruths often times get repeated, my friend.

I would point out to you, that you have previously stated you are not calling the posted sources LIARS, yet here later, you included the very descriptive term "LIES" and that they get repeated, which certainly is an implication of calling those sources LIARS by default. It doesn't matter to me what you would call them, probably you have a very dark opinion of them indeed considering they disagree with your version of Jesuit mining, treasures etc. Rule #21 of course.

Lamar your recent explanation of Jesuit vows sure served to cloud the waters, so to speak, yet does not settle the matter whether a Jesuit would be breaking his vows if he were to be mining when various precepts forbade it. This particular point is not terribly important for a treasure hunter, but would change the record for those involved, from being disobedient to being obedient. I don't expect you will address this matter, for you still maintain that no Jesuits ever had any mines nor treasures in their possession, nor ever hid any of them. As you have refused to answer my previous question to you, about whom you credit as being first European discoverers of silver in Arizona, I won't ask you anything now.

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

Dear Oroblanco;
Perhaps it is best to leave issues of psychology to the psychologists, my friend. To clarify my previous statement(s) a bit:
when this discussion has run it's course, no one will be richer in regards to discovering Jesuit treasure troves, but we will most assuredly become better Roman Catholics in the process! So, it's not ALL bad, everyone..
When I stated no one will be richer because there are no Jesuit treasures lying about, this part would be BAD, yet because I am having to clarify and explain large amount of Roman Catholic dogma, policy, both previous and current, rubrics and doctrines, again both past and present, we are all (myself included, because there is NO WAY that any one person can remember all of this stuff!) becoming more knowledgeable about the inner workings of Our Most Holy Roman Catholic Church. This is the GOOD part, my friend, therefore it is not ALL bad. Also, the smiley face with the thumbs up signified that the statement was made in jest, just like the old style Missals where you say the black and do the red. Smiley face icon=humorous statement. See? Humor!

Moving right along:
Sheesh - I have been living the Jesuit life all these years without even realizing it! Of course I don't have all the wealth and power of the Order and Church behind me, which does make some differences I suppose.

But you COULD be living the life, my friend. It's never too late. You would be surprised at how little physical wealth the *Order* controls and you might also be surprised at how much money the Church spends on charitable works.

Proceeding onwards:
I would point out to you, that you have previously stated you are not calling the posted sources LIARS, yet here later, you included the very descriptive term "LIES" and that they get repeated, which certainly is an implication of calling those sources LIARS by default. It doesn't matter to me what you would call them, probably you have a very dark opinion of them indeed considering they disagree with your version of Jesuit mining, treasures etc. Rule #21 of course.
As I recall, I have stated quite clearly in the recent past that the only people who intentionally slandered( that'd be classified as lying, by the way) the Jesuits were the secular colonists in the New World colonies and everyone else merely repeated and at times, embellished those lies. If they merely repeated the lies, then they are not to be considered as slanderers, merely being slovenly and not performing their own research. If they embellished the lie(s) then they are also guilty.

Also, I painted that statement with a broad brush and I meant for it to be taken that ALL lies pertaining to conspiracy theories in general are unhealthy. And no, I do not have a dark opinion of anyone. In fact I find it to be quite amusing. To explain myself, at one time I also believed in Jesuit treasure hoardes, however after many unsuccessful years I decided to get to root source of the legends. In doing so I've discovered that the Jesuits were caught in the middle of a highly volatile political crossfire from which there was truly no escape.

That the Jesuits were suppressed was the best course of action the Vatican could have possibly taken, because it permitted the Jesuits to thrive and survive in a political climate where there existed few well defined boundaries and many invisible ones.

Continuing on:
Lamar your recent explanation of Jesuit vows sure served to cloud the waters, so to speak, yet does not settle the matter whether a Jesuit would be breaking his vows if he were to be mining when various precepts forbade it. This particular point is not terribly important for a treasure hunter, but would change the record for those involved, from being disobedient to being obedient.

I do not see where I clouded anything, I merely pointed out to Gollum that the Jesuit lay Brothers took the same vows as their ordained counterparts, with the one exception being that the Jesuits whom took only simple vows were permitted to retain their PERSONAL wealth and they were/are also able to bequeath that same wealth to members of their suriving kin, such as neices and/or nephews, or give it all to the Church or to whomever they choose. I understand that the difference between simple and solemn vows is often times a confusing point and it's one which cannot be readily explained on a forum such as this one.

Marching onwards:
As you have refused to answer my previous question to you, about whom you credit as being first European discoverers of silver in Arizona, I won't ask you anything now.


I do apologize now for having missed that present question. To answer it now, might it, could it have possibly been, those dreaded Jesuits (Heaven forbid!)?
Actually, the discoverer credited with the very first silver discovery in what is now present-day Arizona was the Spanish naturalist Antonio de Espejo and he discovered silver deposits of Planchas de Plata in 1583 AD, however they were not exploited until sometime later. He also is credited for discovering the deposits around Jerome also in 1583, and once again these deposits were not exploited until the area was Christianized at a later date.

Fr. Kino also noted numerous *minas* in the area, however the context of the word *mina* most likely meant *deposits* instead of *mines* as no one was mining that area at the time. The word was utilized interchangeably during the period in question, therefore there is little chance that people were actually mining the ore. Also, had the deposits been worked, Fr. Kino would have almost certainly annotated that fact in his letters.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

Lamar wrote

But you COULD be living the life, my friend. It's never too late.

While I do appreciate your saying the door is still open, I seriously doubt the Society would ever want someone like ME within their ranks! Poverty being only one of the vows which I have been upholding (without making any vow) those other vows, ie chastity, honesty for instance, would be certain to get me into troubles I couldn't talk my way out of!

For our readers,
Let us clarify the positions of whom is posting here - I myself, and several others, are very pro-treasure hunting and are trying to always encourage other treasure hunters, as well as to attract new treasure hunters to our fold. This stance is a bias on my part, and I make no secret of it nor any claims to being utterly neutral in any discussion where treasures or lost mines are concerned.

On the other side we have skeptics and Jesuit apologists, whom may not be actually Jesuits per se, but are using their words to defend and protect the Jesuit Order from what they perceive as some kind of assault or slur against them. The skeptics are simply not convinced by what they have seen, but the apologists have a bias and a duty to oppose these treasure stories because (I presume) they see it as slander. For example, not to single out Lamar but as he has so graciously explained earlier, but his words will do;

Lamar wrote

It's simply what I do, my friend. Someone proposes a theory and I shoot it down. Somebody else proposes another theory and I shoot that one down. I consider myself to be a Anti-Theory Gunner, much like an anti-aircraft gunner. Keep sending them up my friend and I'll keep shooting them down.

Whilst I tend to agree with the Society of Jesus in principle, I also tend to disagree with some of their practices, however they ARE a part of the Roman Catholic Church as far as I am aware, and as such I am sworn to defend them from slanders, along with all other persecuted Roman Catholic members, both individuals and Orders. It's simply what I do, my friend.

There is nothing wrong with defending the Society of Jesus, but it is well to consider that this particular defender has in fact SWORN to defend them. This very likely affects his statements.

As for expecting to get "incriminating" documents directly from the Jesuits, our amigo Lamar explained,

the Jesuits, having long been indoctrinated in the conspiracy theories, tend to offer up a pre-bundled bunch of confusing documents without so much as a thought as to the treasure hunter's particular request.

A virtual "flood" of un-related, irrelevant material, which serves to obfuscate, confuse and mislead any potential treasure hunter. Just as one author of Jesuit history stated, it is natural for them to respond to such accusations with a "flood of refutations". Remember Rule #21 at all times, anything which might redound to the discredit of the Order is not going to be available to the public. This is almost certainly the true reason why we do not have much beyond circumstantial evidence directly from the Jesuits, but remember that a man may be convicted of murder based on circumstantial evidence alone. Our subject matter is not a murder case, and we do not need proof beyond a shadow of doubt to find justification to search for lost treasures or mines, though obviously some disagree with me on this point.

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

SWR wrote

On the other side you have historians proper, mainstream rational thinkers <snip>

Ah, so you are a rational thinker, and have placed me and the others posting "my" side, as the opposite, being irrational. Gee thanks for those kind words, with such praise I should be highly honored.

You SWR, whom have so frequently attacked, dismissed and sarcastically assailed the sources previously cited, now point to "real history" as irrefutable, absolute and utterly correct. I could now cite numerous examples of supposedly "real history" which have been proven incorrect and erroneous, including right at the present moment. If you doubt this, I suggest you research the "oldest Spanish mission in Arizona".

I suppose you don't see your last missive as negative either.

Good luck to you kind sir SWR, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

SWR wrote

The true value of the gold may be the story itself, a testament to man’s ability to believe anything for a chance at such a vast fortune

Hmm, can you name say, ten treasure writers whom have "struck it rich" by telling those stories? Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Lamar wrote

But you COULD be living the life, my friend. It's never too late.

While I do appreciate your saying the door is still open, I seriously doubt the Society would ever want someone like ME within their ranks! Poverty being only one of the vows which I have been upholding (without making any vow) those other vows, ie chastity, honesty for instance, would be certain to get me into troubles I couldn't talk my way out of!

For our readers,
Let us clarify the positions of whom is posting here - I myself, and several others, are very pro-treasure hunting and are trying to always encourage other treasure hunters, as well as to attract new treasure hunters to our fold. This stance is a bias on my part, and I make no secret of it nor any claims to being utterly neutral in any discussion where treasures or lost mines are concerned.

On the other side we have skeptics and Jesuit apologists, whom may not be actually Jesuits per se, but are using their words to defend and protect the Jesuit Order from what they perceive as some kind of assault or slur against them. The skeptics are simply not convinced by what they have seen, but the apologists have a bias and a duty to oppose these treasure stories because (I presume) they see it as slander. For example, not to single out Lamar but as he has so graciously explained earlier, but his words will do;

Lamar wrote

It's simply what I do, my friend. Someone proposes a theory and I shoot it down. Somebody else proposes another theory and I shoot that one down. I consider myself to be a Anti-Theory Gunner, much like an anti-aircraft gunner. Keep sending them up my friend and I'll keep shooting them down.

Whilst I tend to agree with the Society of Jesus in principle, I also tend to disagree with some of their practices, however they ARE a part of the Roman Catholic Church as far as I am aware, and as such I am sworn to defend them from slanders, along with all other persecuted Roman Catholic members, both individuals and Orders. It's simply what I do, my friend.

There is nothing wrong with defending the Society of Jesus, but it is well to consider that this particular defender has in fact SWORN to defend them. This very likely affects his statements.

As for expecting to get "incriminating" documents directly from the Jesuits, our amigo Lamar explained,

the Jesuits, having long been indoctrinated in the conspiracy theories, tend to offer up a pre-bundled bunch of confusing documents without so much as a thought as to the treasure hunter's particular request.

A virtual "flood" of un-related, irrelevant material, which serves to obfuscate, confuse and mislead any potential treasure hunter. Just as one author of Jesuit history stated, it is natural for them to respond to such accusations with a "flood of refutations". Remember Rule #21 at all times, anything which might redound to the discredit of the Order is not going to be available to the public. This is almost certainly the true reason why we do not have much beyond circumstantial evidence directly from the Jesuits, but remember that a man may be convicted of murder based on circumstantial evidence alone. Our subject matter is not a murder case, and we do not need proof beyond a shadow of doubt to find justification to search for lost treasures or mines, though obviously some disagree with me on this point.

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

Dear Oroblanco;
Please review the following text carefully, my friend:
Roman Catholic Church as far as I am aware, and as such I am sworn to defend them from slanders, along with all other persecuted Roman Catholic members, both individuals and Orders. It's simply what I do, my friend.


I wrote that statement to encompass ALL Roman Catholics! I was confirmed a Roman Catholic, therefore I uphold all of Her teachings and canons, one of those being to refute all slanders and untruths made against Her and to defend Her good and Holy name. All Roman Catholics are OBLIGATED to do the very same thing as myself. If you are also a Roman Catholic then it might behoove you to follow my lead in this regard.

When I wrote:
the Jesuits, having long been indoctrinated in the conspiracy theories, tend to offer up a pre-bundled bunch of confusing documents without so much as a thought as to the treasure hunter's particular request.[/
What I was meaning was that the Jesuits have heard pretty much every far-out treasure story known to mankind and every time they get a request from some nutcase stating something such as:
"Hi! I'd like all of the information on the Jesuit treasure stashed somewhere around Sonora, please! The one I am talking about is hidden under a huge hollowed out mountain and the gold is stacked in bars inside of a room spanning 200 feet wide by 600 long and is stacked floor to ceiling. The wealth of this particular treasure exceeds 84, trilliony gazilliony billiony dollars (adjusted for inflation) and I certainly would like all documents pertaining to it!"

The Jesuits will undoubtedly chuckle and shake their heads and then promptly send Mr. Dillusional everything they have about Sonora, whether it pertains to the alledged trove or not, because the trove is obviously NOT REAL, therefore why would they waste time on trying to supply something which does not exist in the first place? In other words, if you request REAL information from them about a REAL subject you will undoubtedly recieve some REAL material, but if they get a whiff that you might be a treasure hunter, and trust me they can spot one from 10 miles off(tehy've seen just about every type of fanatical Jesuit treausre seeker there is), they'll go "Ahhhhhhhhhhh sheesh! Not ANOTHER one!" and prepare themselves to be friendly and thoughtful and kind, yet they cannot produce what they do not have, therefore they can only give the person the material which they DO have, which is of no help at all. In other words, they will not devote an inordinate amount of time resources and effort to assist someone is attempting the impossible, when their efforts can be much better utilized in assisting someone who has their feet planted on this planet.

Next, you keep referring to this:
Remember Rule #21 at all times,
What in the world is rule #21? Please explain this in a bit greater detail.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

Lamar, it is interesting how you describe treasure hunters seeking information from the Jesuits,

"Nutcase", "Mr Disillusional", and "ah sheesh not another one!"

Lamar wrote

Next, you keep referring to this:
Remember Rule #21 at all times,
What in the world is rule #21? Please explain this in a bit greater detail.

This has been posted and explained previously in this very thread amigo, I suggest you re-read the posts.
Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

PS - whoops forgot this part,
Lamar wrote

If you are also a Roman Catholic then it might behoove you <snip>

I presume you must not be addressing ME, for I have previously mentioned that I am not Catholic. Actually I don't see what grounds there are, for interpreting pioneer Jesuits as being the first successful miners in the southwest USA as "slander" - it is, from my perspective as a prospector and treasure hunter (and struggling writer) it is quite an honor. Espejo's discovery notwithstanding, his mining was not successful and even the discovery was abortive in the sense that he did not return to develop the discovery and thus enrich himself, his nation and society in general with a flow of new 'real' money. *(Yep silver and gold are real money in my opinion, paper is simply paper, plastic is worse even than paper for the "money" it represents is by nature theoretical. Apologies for drifting off-topic.)*
Please do continue amigos.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Lamar, it is interesting how you describe treasure hunters seeking information from the Jesuits,

"Nutcase", "Mr Disillusional", and "ah sheesh not another one!"

Lamar wrote

Next, you keep referring to this:
Remember Rule #21 at all times,
What in the world is rule #21? Please explain this in a bit greater detail.

This has been posted and explained previously in this very thread amigo, I suggest you re-read the posts.
Oroblanco

Dear oroblanco;
No problem. Since you've devoted time digging through all of my old threads and providing snippets of my prior statements for everyone, I thought that perhaps you could also be so generous as to provide a link which pertains to thr 21st rule.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Beth,

Once again, thank you for your reply.

"1603 is when the bells were cast, so, I would have to think that the metal was already there. You gotta have the raw materials to even start.
And, as you know, Tayopa is one of 17 mines."

I am sure you are aware that the mines in the area were discovered in 1739. There is no record of the people in that area ever being served by Jesuits. During that era the people in the real "were taken care of by Franciscans from the hospice of Arivechi."

Has anyone ever looked into a Jesuit priest named, "Ignacio Maria de Retana"? So far, I have been unable to find this priest in any of my sources. Admittedly, my search has been somewhat cursory at this point......Lamar

I assume we are talking about "Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe de Tayopa Mission", but not the new church built in the early 20th. Century. The old buuilding was around 1 1/2 miles away. The walls of that building are reduced to about one foot high, and the campo santo which is still used for burials is located at this old site.

Is it believed that the Tayopa Mine was still being worked up until the expulsion?

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Lamar wrote

Dear oroblanco;
No problem. Since you've devoted time digging through all of my old threads and providing snippets of my prior statements for everyone, I thought that perhaps you could also be so generous as to provide a link which pertains to thr 21st rule

Scrolling up the current page to post 521
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,286969.msg2096278.html#msg2096278
Reply #490
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,286969.msg2094522.html#msg2094522

first post mentioning it, #54
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,286969.msg2060172.html#msg2060172

citing Regulations Compiled By Father Alonso de Arrivillaga 15 September 1715:

Rule 21 orders that Ours will not communicate to laymen anything that redounds to the discredit of Our Missionaries

Happy to oblige, and my apologies for using your previous posts to illustrate my point viz Jesuit apologists. It was merely to point out our very different positions.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Beth,

Once again, thank you for your reply.

"1603 is when the bells were cast, so, I would have to think that the metal was already there. You gotta have the raw materials to even start.
And, as you know, Tayopa is one of 17 mines."

I am sure you are aware that the mines in the area were discovered in 1739. There is no record of the people in that area ever being served by Jesuits. During that era the people in the real "were taken care of by Franciscans from the hospice of Arivechi."

Has anyone ever looked into a Jesuit priest named, "Ignacio Maria de Retana"? So far, I have been unable to find this priest in any of my sources. Admittedly, my search has been somewhat cursory at this point......Lamar

I assume we are talking about "Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe de Tayopa Mission", but not the new church build in the early 20th. Century. The old buuilding was around 1 1/2 miles away. The walls of that building are reduced to about one foot high, and the campo santo which is still used for burials is located at this old site.

Is it believed that the Tayopa Mine was still being worked up until the expulsion?

Take care,

Joe

Dear Cactusjumper;
To answer your enquiry, no I have not bothered checking on a certain Fr. Ignacio Mario de Retana, mostly because the name is false, my friend. The last name DE Retana refers to a place name (meaning OF or FROM), such as an area or village, yet no such place name exists, either in Europe or Mexico, therefore the last name cannot be real, my friend. The name RETANA is in fact a last name of Spanish origins, yet no one can be named DE Retana.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

SWR wrote

Par for the course. You conveniently snip/butcher/mutilate portions of a post to twist/spin a sentence.

I said MAINSTREAM RATIONAL THINKERS....not just rational thinkers

So there is some important difference by omitting a term "mainstream" which is your own definition of that term in that usage, which by the way I disagree with? Still baiting for a flame-war SWR? Have a pleasant evening, I won't trouble you further.

Good luck and good hunting to you all, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[lamar]

Dear SWR;
I think it was Tertullian who first wrote:
Credo quia absurdum est
Which means:
I believe it because it is absurd
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[lamar]

Dear SWR;
Actually my friend, thinking that the Jesuits spent half of their time mining for gold and silver and the other half burying it is fairly mainstream thinking for this particular thread.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Dear Lamar,

Thank you for your reply. I had already looked into the matter, but was hoping that Beth might seek out the information for herself. Such facts have more impact when they are won through one's own efforts.

Interestingly enough, there was a General Retana in Tarahumara during the Pima revolt of 1751.

Since the arguments here, are that the Jesuits used their mining profits to lavish their missions with gold and silver artifacts, one might want to examine the condition of Tayopa prior to the expulsion.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Lamar: You posted-->

The last name DE Retana refers to a place name (meaning OF or FROM), such as an area or village, yet no such place name exists, either in Europe or Mexico, therefore the last name cannot be real, my friend. The name RETANA is in fact a last name of Spanish origins, yet no one can be named DE Retana.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am surprised at you for making such abasic booboo. 'All' Formal Spanish names specifically use it, it means 'from', yes, but not necessarily geographically, but hereditarily.

Ex. Maria de Carmen, Bay. literally 'Maria out of Carmen, by Bay'. Same as animal designations. Some formal names even go back 2 - 3 generations.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[gollum]

To answer the sweeping statement that no one named "De Retana" could possibly exist because no such place as Retana exists.

One has simply to "Google" the words "de retana" to immediately find this modern person:

http://www.accumalaga.es/Todas-las-...e-de-ACCU-Malaga-Ignacio-Ochoa-de-Retana.html

IGNACIO OCHOA DE RETANA

Best-Mike

 

[lamar]

Lamar: You posted-->

The last name DE Retana refers to a place name (meaning OF or FROM), such as an area or village, yet no such place name exists, either in Europe or Mexico, therefore the last name cannot be real, my friend. The name RETANA is in fact a last name of Spanish origins, yet no one can be named DE Retana.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am surprised at you for making such abasic booboo. 'All' Formal Spanish names specifically use it, it means 'from', yes, but not necessarily geographically, but hereditarily.

Ex. Maria de Carmen, Bay. literally 'Maria out of Carmen, by Bay'. Same as animal designations. Some formal names even go back 2 - 3 generations.

Don Jose de La Mancha

Dear Real de Tayopa;
And I am no less surprised at you for making such a booboo my friend. Yes, the word DE can be used in that regard, but only if the person were of noble birth. There is no Retana family of noble Spainish birth, therefore that becomes a moot point. The *de* rule was very true at one time in Italian society for last names, however there exists no surname de Retana amongst the Italians, therefore that is once again a moot point.
Your friend;
LAMAR